Allahabad High Court Weekly Roundup: June 10 - June 16, 2024

NOMINAL INDEX Mamta Kapoor and Another v. Vinod Kumar Rai 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 382 Naziya Ansari And Another vs. State Of Up And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 383 Archana Singh Gautam vs. State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 384 Shiva Pankaj And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 385 Sumit Kumar Alias Sumit Kumar Gupta And Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 386 Pradum Singh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 387 Mrs. Ameena Jung and Anr. vs. Faridi Waqf Thru. Mutwalli Mrs. Anush Faridi Khan and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 388 Puneet Mishra Alias Puneet Kumar Mishra And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 389 The State of UP and 5 others v. Geeta Rani W/O Late Man Singh (Head Constable Civil Police) M/S Rajshi Processors Raebareli Thru. Its Partner Ashok Kumar Lakhotia v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of State Tax,Lko. And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 391 Vimal Rajput vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 392 Kavita Singh v. State of U.P. And 5 Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 393 Informant/Victim vs State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 394 Orders/Judgments of the Week [Commercial Courts Act] Disputes Related To Immovable Property Used Exclusively For Trade Are 'Commercial Disputes: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Mamta Kapoor and Another v. Vinod Kumar Rai 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 382 [MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. – 4127 of 2023] Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 382 The Allahabad High Court, while considering the case of a hotel, has held that a dispute related to an immovable property that is used exclusively for the purpose of trade or commerce would fall under the ambit of a 'Commercial Dispute' under Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. “Agreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce fall under the purview of “commercial disputes” as definer by Section 2(c)(vii) of the CC Act. This categorization highlights the specific nature of such agreements and their inherent connection to commercial activities,” held Justice Shekhar B. Saraf. Adult's Right To Solemnise Marriage Or Live With Person Of Choice Protected Under Article 21: Allahabad High Court Case title - Naziya Ansari And Another vs. State Of Up And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 383 [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 9396 of 2024] Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 383 In a significant remark, the Allahabad High Court has said that no one can restrain an adult from going anywhere that he/she likes, staying with a person of his/her choice, or solemnizing marriage according to his/her will or wish as “this is a right which flows from Article 21 of the Constitution” Observing thus, a bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal also criticised a Judicial Magistrate for sending an adult woman (petitioner no. 1) to her uncle's home after the uncle (respondent no. 3) lodged an FIR against her husband (petitioner no. 2). Cheques Of Erstwhile 'Allahabad Bank' Invalid After Sept 30 2021, Their 'Dishonor' Won't Attract Offence U/S 138 NI Act: Allahabad HC Case title - Archana Singh Gautam vs. State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 384 Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 384 The Allahabad High Court has ruled that cheques from the erstwhile 'Allahabad Bank' (which merged with 'Indian Bank' on April 1, 2020) became 'invalid' after September 30, 2021. Consequently, the dishonour of such cheques will not constitute an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal observed thus in light of the mandate of Section 138 NI Act, the proviso (a) of which states that a cheque must be presented to the Bank 'during its validity'. Petition U/S 483 CrPC Seeking Direction To Family Court For Expeditious Disposal Of S. 125 CrPC Plea Is Maintainable: Allahabad HC Case title - Shiva Pankaj And Another vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 385 Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 385 The Allahabad High Court has held that an application filed under Section 483 CrPC seeking a direction to the Family Court to expedite the disposal of an application under Section 125 CrPC, would be maintainable. A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi clarified that while deciding an application under Section 125 CrPC, the Family Court exercises the jurisdiction of a magistrate. Therefore, a Section 483 CrPC application seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 125 CrPC would be maintainable. Orders Appealable U/S 14A Of SC/ST Act Can't Be Challenged By Filing A Plea U/S 482 Of CrPC: Allahabad HC...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Roundup: June 10 - June 16, 2024

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags