Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 24 To April 30, 2023
Sparsh Upadhyay
1 May 2023 12:06 PM GMT
NOMINAL INDEX Raje @ Rajesh @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 136 Asif Ahmad Siddiqui vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 137 Kamlesh Paswan And 6 Others vs. State of U.P. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 138 Indra Pal and another vs. State of U.P. along with a connected appeal 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 139 ORDERS/JUDGMENT OF THE WEEK Insistence On Corroboration...
NOMINAL INDEX
Raje @ Rajesh @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 136
Asif Ahmad Siddiqui vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 137
Kamlesh Paswan And 6 Others vs. State of U.P. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 138
Indra Pal and another vs. State of U.P. along with a connected appeal 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 139
ORDERS/JUDGMENT OF THE WEEK
Case Title - Raje @ Rajesh @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1399 of 2010]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 136
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that a woman or a girl who is raped is not an accomplice and to insist on corroboration of her testimony amounts to an insult to womanhood.
The bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra further observed that an accused can be convicted on the basis of the sole testimony of a rape victim, without any further corroboration, provided that the evidence of such a victim inspires confidence and appears to be natural and truthful.
Case title - Asif Ahmad Siddiqui vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5500 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 137
The Allahabad High Court observed that a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on the basis of a police report in terms of Section 190 (1)(b) of CrPC, can issue a summons to a person even on the basis of the statement under Section 164 CrPC, even though such a person is not arraigned as an accused in the police report or in the FIR.
The Bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan, however, clarified that before summoning persons upon taking cognizance of an offence, the Magistrate has to examine the materials available before him for coming to a prima facie conclusion that apart from those sent up by the police, some other persons are involved in the offence.
Case title - Kamlesh Paswan And 6 Others vs. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2102 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 138
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to sitting BJP MP (from Bansgaon) Kamlesh Paswan and stayed the sentence of 1.5 years awarded to him by the Trial court in connection with a riots case registered in the year 2008 during the pendency of his revision plea before the HC.
The bench of Justice Rajeev Misra passed this order considering the fact that Paswan is an MP and the Judgment of the trial court will cast a stigma upon his political career.
"Considering the facts that revisionist-applicant-1 Kamlesh Paswan is a sitting M.P. and the judgments and orders impugned in present criminal revision, will cast a stigma upon his political career, as such they have serious consequences. The consequences are of unverifiable character. Considering the above as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in Navjot Singh Siddhu Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 Volume II SCC 574, it is, hereby, provided that the sentence awarded to revisionist-applicant-1 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the revision," the Court said.
Case title - Indra Pal and another vs. State of U.P. along with a connected appeal
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 139
The Allahabad High Court altered the Kidnapping for Ransom (Section 364A IPC) conviction of two men who kidnapped an 11-year-old boy, to that of Kidnapping with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person (Section 365 IPC), on the ground that the alleged letter for ransom sent to father of the child was not proved by prosecution.
Taking into account the evidence on record, the bench of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava observed that the intention of the appellants/convicts for kidnapping the son of the informant was to keep him secretly and under wrongful confinement.
Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: April 24 To April 30, 2023
NOMINAL INDEX
Raje @ Rajesh @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 136
Asif Ahmad Siddiqui vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 137
Kamlesh Paswan And 6 Others vs. State of U.P. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 138
Indra Pal and another vs. State of U.P. along with a connected appeal 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 139
ORDERS/JUDGMENT OF THE WEEK
Case Title - Raje @ Rajesh @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1399 of 2010]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 136
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that a woman or a girl who is raped is not an accomplice and to insist on corroboration of her testimony amounts to an insult to womanhood.
The bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra further observed that an accused can be convicted on the basis of the sole testimony of a rape victim, without any further corroboration, provided that the evidence of such a victim inspires confidence and appears to be natural and truthful.
Case title - Asif Ahmad Siddiqui vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5500 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 137
The Allahabad High Court observed that a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on the basis of a police report in terms of Section 190 (1)(b) of CrPC, can issue a summons to a person even on the basis of the statement under Section 164 CrPC, even though such a person is not arraigned as an accused in the police report or in the FIR.
The Bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan, however, clarified that before summoning persons upon taking cognizance of an offence, the Magistrate has to examine the materials available before him for coming to a prima facie conclusion that apart from those sent up by the police, some other persons are involved in the offence.
Case title - Kamlesh Paswan And 6 Others vs. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2102 of 2023]
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 138
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to sitting BJP MP (from Bansgaon) Kamlesh Paswan and stayed the sentence of 1.5 years awarded to him by the Trial court in connection with a riots case registered in the year 2008 during the pendency of his revision plea before the HC.
The bench of Justice Rajeev Misra passed this order considering the fact that Paswan is an MP and the Judgment of the trial court will cast a stigma upon his political career.
"Considering the facts that revisionist-applicant-1 Kamlesh Paswan is a sitting M.P. and the judgments and orders impugned in present criminal revision, will cast a stigma upon his political career, as such they have serious consequences. The consequences are of unverifiable character. Considering the above as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in Navjot Singh Siddhu Vs. State of Punjab, 2007 Volume II SCC 574, it is, hereby, provided that the sentence awarded to revisionist-applicant-1 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the revision," the Court said.
Case title - Indra Pal and another vs. State of U.P. along with a connected appeal
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 139
The Allahabad High Court altered the Kidnapping for Ransom (Section 364A IPC) conviction of two men who kidnapped an 11-year-old boy, to that of Kidnapping with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person (Section 365 IPC), on the ground that the alleged letter for ransom sent to father of the child was not proved by prosecution.
Taking into account the evidence on record, the bench of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava observed that the intention of the appellants/convicts for kidnapping the son of the informant was to keep him secretly and under wrongful confinement.
