Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 15 To May 21

NOMINAL INDEX Prashant Chandra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 148 Ranjeeta @ Ravita vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 149 Manas Vatsa vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 150 Waseem Khan vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nyay Lko. And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 151 Kamal Singh vs. State of U.P. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 152 Azaj Ahamad vs. U.O.I. Ministry Of Affairs Thru. Secy.And 4 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 153 Dr Ram Manohar Lohia Institute Of Medical Sciences, Lko. Thru. Director And Others vs. Dr. Charu Mahajan And Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 154 Swami Prasad Maurya vs. State Of U.P. And Anr 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 155 Prakash Narayan Sharma @ Babali vs. State of UP 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 156 State of UP vs. Ajai Mishra @ Taini And 3 Ors along with a connected criminal revision plea 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 157 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK Section 138 NI Act| 'Notice Not Invalid If Other Amount Is Separately Indicated Therein Along With Cheque Amount': Allahabad High Court Case title - Prashant Chandra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4587 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 148 The Allahabad High Court has held that if in a demand notice, other amounts are mentioned along with the cheque amount in a separate portion in detail, the said notice can not be faulted in a legal term of Section 138 (b) of the Act, 1881. For context, as per Section 138 (b) of the 1881 Act, the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, on the dishonour of the cheque, has to make a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid. Trial Court Not Barred From Granting Maintenance From Date Of Order If Reasons Exist For Doing So: Allahabad High Court Case title - Ranjeeta @ Ravita vs. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1165 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 149 The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 has not completely blocked the discretionary power of the trial court in granting maintenance from the date of order in the case there are circumstances and reasons for doing the same. For context, in Rajnesh v. Neha (supra), the Court, in 2020, issued guidelines on payment of maintenance in matrimonial matters. In that case, it was held that maintenance in all cases will be awarded from the date of filing the application for maintenance. 'Raise Claims For Arrears Of Rent Through District Judges, Don't Take Recourse To Judicial Proceedings': Allahabad HC Directs State Judicial Officers Case title - Manas Vatsa vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [WRIT - A No. - 8267 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 150 The Allahabad High Court has directed all the Judicial Officers seeking to arrears of rent (in the event the Judicial Officer was not provided Government accommodation) should raise their claims through their respective District Judges and not take recourse to judicial proceedings for the same "...it is not in the interest of justice and principle of separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive that Judicial Officers should take recourse to judicial proceedings in such matters for redressal of their grievance, in particular, arrears of rent," the bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Rajendra Kumar-IV observed. 'Court Not A Post Office Or Mouthpiece Of State/District Magistrate': Allahabad HC Quashes Order Attaching Properties Under UP Gangster Act Case title - Waseem Khan vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nyay Lko. And Another [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 203 of 2023] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 151 The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), while ordering the release of the attached properties of one Wasim Khan under the UP-Gangster Act, observed that the court is not empowered to act as a post office or mouthpiece of the State or the District Magistrate. The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed thus while quashing orders of the seizure (of the properties of the alleged gangster Wasim Khan) sanctioned by the District Magistrate, Lucknow and upheld by the Special Judge, Gangster Act, Lucknow. Use Of Lethal Weapon Sufficient To Constitute Offence U/S 307 IPC If Attempt To Cause Injury Is Made With Intention To Murder: Allahabad HC Case title - Kamal Singh vs. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1496 of 1995] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 152 The Allahabad High Court has observed that the mere use of a lethal weapon is sufficient to invoke the provisions of Section 307 and that it is not necessary to constitute the offence that the attack should result in...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 15 To May 21

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags