High Courts Weekly Roundup [March 8, 2021 – March 14, 2021]

Allahabad High Court 1. Writ Of Habeas Corpus Not Maintainable Against Judicial Order Of Magistrate /CWC Sending Minor Victim To Children Protection Homes:Allahabad High Court (FB) [Rachna & Anr. v. State of UP & Ors.] A Full Bench comprising of Justice Siddhartha Varma, Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Sanjay Yadav held that an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate or Child Welfare Committee sending victim to women protection homes/child care homes cannot be challenged or set aside in a writ of habeas corpus. Subsequently, the Bench also observed that the detention of a corpus in such child care homes cannot be treated as an illegal detention. It was dealing with the reference in a habeas corpus petition seeking directions on Superintendent of Children Home (Girl) to release the minor girl namely Anchal, aged 17 years, who was allegedly illegally detained in the Children Home. 2. Ladies' Toilets In Police Stations: Allahabad High Court Asks UP Home Secretary To File Affidavit Or Remain Personally Present Before Court [Anjali Pandey & Ors. v. State of UP & Ors.] A Division Bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Yadav and Jayant Banerji told the Home Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Government to file an affidavit in respect of steps taken for construction of ladies' toilets in each Police Stations in the state. it further told the State counsel that in case an affidavit is not filed, the Secretary should personally remain present before the Court on the next date of hearing. The development comes few days after the Court expressed displeasure at the fact no immediate steps have been taken by the UP Government for availability of toilets/washrooms and other essential amenities for female police personnel at different police stations. 3. Police Were At Informant's Doorstep, Yet Prompt Reporting Of Incident Was Withheld: Allahabad HC Acquits Murder Accused Over Delay Of 3.5 Hrs In Lodging Of FIR [Mukesh Tiwari v. State of UP] A Division Bench comprising of Justices Manoj Misra and Sanjay Kumar Pachor allowed a criminal appeal and set aside an order of conviction passed under Section 302 of IPC for the offence of murder, citing a delay of 3 hours 20 minutes in lodging of FIR against the alleged offence. It held that the aforesaid delay was 'unreasonable' in view of the fact that the Police authorities arrived at the place of occurrence immediately after the incident. The order stated, "Normally, a delay of few hours, particularly in night incidents, might not be considered significant but here the police were at the doorstep of the informant and the injured (Pratap Shankar Mishra) was carried to the hospital by the police, with Mazrubi Chitthi, and a so-called witness, who was there at the place of incident and happens to be the brother of the eye-witness, yet prompt reporting of the incident was withheld, which suggests that either the incident was not witnessed or if witnessed, the identity of the assailant was not certain, therefore, the guess-work delayed the FIR." 4. 'Evidence Of Interested Witnesses Should Be Subjected To Careful Scrutiny & Accepted With Caution': Reiterates Allahabad High Court [Rampal Singh & Ors. v. State of UP] A Division Bench comprising of Justices Manoj Misra and Saumitra Dayal Singh held that the testimony of an interested witness, though admissible, should be accepted by the Court after a careful scrutiny and corroboration with other materials placed on record. It observed, "an interested witness must be tested more carefully before any firm conclusion may be reached thereon." In this context, the Bench referred to a decision of the Apex Court in Jalpat Rai v. State of Haryana, 2011 (14) SCC 208, where it was held, "All that is necessary is that the evidence of interested witnesses should be subjected to careful scrutiny and accepted with caution. If on such scrutiny, the interested testimony is found to be intrinsically reliable or inherently probable, it may, by itself, be sufficient, in the circumstances of the particular case, to base a conviction thereon." Other developments: CAA Protests: "His Movement Could Be Controlled Through Suitable Conditions": Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Student ActivistTandav Row: Allahabad HC Lucknow Bench Extends Interim Protection From Arrest For Amazon Prime Video Head Aparna Purohit In Lucknow FIR Till April 6 Bombay High Court 1. 'Ship's Captain Leaves Last': Bombay HC CJ Cites 'Titanic' While Hearing PIL On Vaccination For Legal Fraternity Chief Justice Dipankar Datta invoked the iconic American epic – Titanic – to express his views on a PIL seeking to declare members of the legal fraternity, including Judges, as frontline workers and to vaccinate them for the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) coronavirus on a priority basis. "Have you seen the English movie Titanic? Do you recollect the captain of...

High Courts Weekly Roundup [March 8, 2021 – March 14, 2021]

Akshita Saxena

Tags