High Courts Weekly Roundup [March 15 - March 21]

Allahabad High Court 1. Hathras Case Trial- Threats Extended To Victim's Counsel, Family In Open Court: Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Into The Incident, Warns Of Contempt Action [Suo-Moto Inre: Right To Decent & Dignified Last Rites/Cremation] Taking into account the complaint made by the Victim's family in Hathras Rape and Murder case regarding the threats extended to them, including the Counsel for the Victim's family in open Court, a bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Jaspreet Singh directed an inquiry into the allegations. It also warned of initiating contempt proceedings against the culprits. The counsel for the victim's brother apprised the Court of an incident which took place on 05th March 2021, when two prosecution witnesses (including the victim's brother) had presented themselves before the Special Court at Hathras where the matter is pending trial. Allegedly, shortly after the prosecution witness began deposing before the Presiding Officer, Special Court (SC/ST Act), Hathras on 05th March 2021, an advocate stormed into the courtroom and charged towards the applicant and the complainant counsel, shouting and issuing threats. Allegedly, at the same time, a large mob, including lawyers, entered the courtroom and surrounded the applicant and the complainant's counsel in order to threaten and intimidate them. 2. UP Panchayat Polls- "Consider 2015 And Not 1995 As 'Base Year' For Reserving Seats, Hold Elections By May 25": Allahabad High Court [Ajay Kumar v. State Of UP & Ors.] A Division Bench of Justices Manish Mathur and Ritu Raj Awasthi quashed an order of the Uttar Pradesh government dealing with the reservation of seats (for various categories of candidates) for the upcoming panchayat polls, taking 1995 as the base year. The Government submitted that it has no objection to implement the reservation and allotment of seats of constituencies in Panchayat's elections taking 2015 as the base year. Citing demographic changes on the basis of census of 2001 and 2011, it was argued that it wouldn't be conducive to have 1995 as the base year for purposes of applying reservation and that the base year in view of the changed demographic situation was required to be taken as 2015. 3. Allahabad High Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Re-Allocation Of Territorial Jurisdiction Between Benches At Prayagraj & Lucknow [Ashok Pandey & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.] A Division Bench comprising of Justices Ritu Raj Awasthi and Manish Mathur issued notice to the Awadh Bar Association on a PIL seeking re-allocation of territorial jurisdiction between the two benches of the High Court at Prayagraj and Lucknow. It said that it would like the Association to express its views and address the Court on the abovesaid issue. The development comes at a time when the High Court Bar Associations of the two Benches are already at loggerheads with respect to establishment of Tribunals in the State. The instant PIL emphasizes that under the current system, cases from 60 districts of UP fall under the jurisdiction of the Principal seat at Prayaraj whereas cases from only 15 districts are filed at Lucknow. The plea also challenges the applicability of the United Provinces' High Court Amalgamation Order, 1948 and the Indian High Court's Act, 1861, which declare that the principal seat of the High Court will be at Allahabad. It is argued that the Act of 1861 and the Order of 1948 ceased to operate after coming into force of the Indian Constitution in 1950. The plea further states, "the present high courts are the creation of our Constitution through its Article 216 and not some Act passed by the invaders (British Parliament)." 4. Allahabad High Court To Decide Maintainability Of Civil Suit Filed In Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi Masjid Land Title Dispute; Order Reserved [Anjuman Intezamiya Masajid Varanasi v. Ist Additional District Judge, Varanasi & Ors.] A Single Bench of Justice Prakash Padia reserved its judgment on a plea challenging maintainability of a civil suit pending before the Varansi District Court with respect to land-title dispute in the Kashi Vishwanath - Gyanvapi Masjid case. The land title dispute relates to the Gyanpavi Mosque, allegedly built on the ruins of Kashi Vishwanath temple. According to the suit filed by the Temple's Trust in 1991 in the Varansi District Court, the temple was destroyed by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in 1664 and the mosque was built using the remains of the temple. In the instant petition, Anjuman Intazamia Masazid, Varanasi had challenged the maintainability of the said suit. The case of the Petitioner is that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 bars filing of suit or any other legal proceedings with respect to conversion of religious character of any place of worship, existing on August 15, 1947. Other developments: Allahabad High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance On Report ...

High Courts Weekly Roundup [March 15 - March 21]

Akshita Saxena

Important Judgments/ Orders this week:

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

High Courts Weekly Roundup [March 15 - March 21]

Akshita Saxena

Important Judgments/ Orders this week:

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers