Allahabad High Court Weekly Roundup: March 25 – March 31, 2024

NOMINAL INDEX Dr. Vinod Kumar Bassi vs. The State Of U.P And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 193 Vishwanath vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 194 Mariya Zameel Urf Riya And Another vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 195 Divisional Forest Officer North Kheri v. Surjan Singh And Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 196 The Public Works Department Thru. Chief Engineer vs Pnc Infratech Limited Thru. Authorized Signatory 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 197 Anil Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 198 Ram Avtar v. M/s Durga Rice & Dall Mills & 5 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 199 Raj Babbar vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt Govt. Of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 200 ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK Additional Chief Medical Officer Has No Authority To File A Complaint For Any Offence Under PCPNDT Act: Allahabad HC Case title - Dr. Vinod Kumar Bassi vs. The State Of U.P And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 193 [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2998 of 2014] Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 193 The Allahabad High Court has held that an Additional Chief Medical Officer is not an appropriate authority and he has no authority to file a complaint for any alleged offence committed under the provisions of the Pre-Conception & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994. A Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held thus while perusing the mandate of Sections 28 and Section 17 (1) & (2) of the 1994 Act. For context, Section 28 bars courts from taking cognizance of an offence under the Act except on a complaint made by the Appropriate Authority. Section 17 provides for the manner of appointment of an 'appropriate authority'. S. 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC Doesn't Bar FIR Registration Where Alleged Forgery In Documents Took Place Outside Court: Allahabad HC Case title - Vishwanath vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 194 [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 185 of 2023] Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 194 The Allahabad High Court has observed that Section 195 (1) (b) (ii) CrPC doesn't bar registration of FIR in a case where alleged forgery has been committed in the document outside the Court and thereafter, the alleged forged document was filed in judicial proceedings in a case pending in a Court. For context, Section 195(1)(b)(ii) provides that no Court shall take cognizance of offences of Forgery, etc. when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court. UP 'Anti-Conversion' Law Applicable To Live-In Relationships Too: Allahabad High Court Case title - Mariya Zameel Urf Riya And Another vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 195 [WRIT - C No. - 1067 of 2024] Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 195 The Allahabad High Court observed that the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 applies not only to marriages but to relationships in the nature of marriage or live-in relationships. A bench of Justice Renu Agarwal made this observation while dismissing a protection plea filed by an interfaith couple (petitioners) as it noted that the duo had not applied for registration of any conversion under the provisions of the 2021 Act. No Suit For Injunction Maintainable Against Notifications Declaring Land As Reserved Forest Under Indian Forest Act: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Divisional Forest Officer North Kheri v. Surjan Singh And Others [SECOND APPEAL No. - 756 of 1982] Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 196 The Allahabad High Court has held that suit for permanent injunction under Section 229B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act 1950 is not maintainable against the notification issued under Section 4 and Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 declaring a land as reserved forest area. The Court held that such notifications can only be challenged before the Forest Settlement Officer as per the procedure prescribed in the Act of 1927. “….once notification under Section 4 and Section 20 of the Act of 1927 were issued and published in official gazette, it will be deemed that they have been issued in accordance with law after following due procedure of law and it could not have been held illegal or inoperative without challenge to the notifications in appropriate proceedings but not in a suit for permanent injunction,” held Justice Rajnish Kumar. Questions Of Agreement Implications And Legal Provisions Need To Be Decided By Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 A&C Act: Allahabad High Court Case Title: The Public Works Department Thru. Chief Engineer vs Pnc Infratech Limited Thru. Authorized Signatory. Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 197 The Allahabad High Court held that questions of implications of agreements, Section 64 of the Contract Act, whether the disputes relate to the construction stage or implications of legal...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Roundup: March 25 – March 31, 2024

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags