'Bunch Of Liars': Allahabad High Court Pulls Up SHO, SP Over Police Station CCTV Lapses; Orders ₹65K Compensation For Illegal Detention

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday came down heavily on the Station House Officer (SHO) of a Police Station in District Deoria and the concerned Superintendent of Police (SP), questioning them over the failure of the police station CCTV system and the absence of CCTV footage in a case concerning the illegal detention of 4 petitioners for 10 days. During the hearing, a bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant expressed its disappointment with police officials...

Order XXI CPC Not Applicable To Execution Of Eviction Orders Passed Under Section 67 UP Revenue Code: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an order of eviction or of compensation passed under Section 67(3) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 cannot be executed through the long drawn procedure prescribed under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It held that the Code of 2006 and the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 themselves supply the machinery for enforcing such orders.The bench...

Order 39 CPC | Bar On Grant Of Final Relief At Interim Stage Is Not An Absolute Proposition Of Law: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that the bar on granting relief at the interim stage which resembles the final relief is not an absolute proposition of law and creates no jurisdictional embargo on the grant of a temporary injunction. It held that the question turns on the facts of each case, with the prima facie case tested at a higher level.Justice Jaspreet Singh held,“Thus, to state as...

Magistrate Can Reject Police Final Report And Summon Accused If Case Diary Discloses Prima Facie Offence: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a Magistrate may take cognizance of an offence under Section 190(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and summon the accused even where the police have filed a final report concluding that no case is made out, and that in doing so he is not required to follow the procedure prescribed under Sections 200 and 202 of the Code. It held that at that stage...

Civil Services | Disciplinary Proceedings Can't Continue After Retirement Without Governor Sanction Under Regulation 351-A: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a disciplinary proceeding initiated against a government servant before his retirement cannot continue after he retires, and no punishment can be imposed on its basis, without the sanction of the Governor under Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations.Regulation 351-A reserves to the Governor the right to withhold or withdraw a pension and to...

Charge-Sheet Witnesses Must Be Examined In Presence Of Delinquent Employee, Deviation Infringes Natural Justice: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that Rule 7(vii) of the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 requires the Inquiry Officer to record the oral evidence of the witnesses named in the charge-sheet in the presence of the charged government servant, and any deviation infringes the principles of natural justice. It held that the opportunity to cross-examine must be given...

Revisional Authority Can't Set Aside Final Order Passed By Coordinate Revisional Authority In Separate Revision: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a revisional authority deciding a revision under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 has no jurisdiction to set aside a final judgment already rendered by another revisional authority of coordinate jurisdiction in a separate revision arising out of the same appellate order.Section 219(1) of the Act allows the specified revenue authorities to...

Allahabad High Court Directs CAT To Expeditiously Decide Ex-IPS Amitabh Thakur's Challenge To Compulsory Retirement

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has directed the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Lucknow Bench, to expeditiously decide ex-IPS officer Amitabh Thakur's challenge to his compulsory retirement, which has been pending before the Tribunal since 2021. A bench of Justice Jaspreet Singh passed the order while dealing with a petition filed by Thakur under Article 227 of the Constitution, seeking expeditious disposal of his pending Application filed in 2021.Thakur approached the High...

UP Ceiling Act | Land Transfer During Pending Proceedings Is Void, Can't Be Saved By Tenure-Holder's 'Right Of Choice': Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a transfer of land made during the continuance of proceedings for determination of surplus land is void under Section 5(8) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. It held that the Prescribed Authority cannot validate such a transfer by accepting the choice exercised by the tenure-holder under Section 12-A of the Act.Section 5(6) of...

Bigamy Strictly Prohibited: Allahabad High Court Upholds CRPF Constable's Dismissal Under 'Minor Punishments' Provision

The Allahabad High Court has held that a member of the Central Reserve Police Force can be dismissed from service under Section 11 of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949, which is headed 'Minor punishments'. It held that the punishments listed in clauses (a) to (e) of Section 11(1) are awardable in addition to, or in lieu of, suspension or dismissal, and are not the only punishments...

Regularisation Takes Effect From Date Of Appointment Under Rules, Not Initial Ad-Hoc Appointment: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an ad hoc employee regularised under the U.P. Regularization of Ad-Hoc Appointments (on Posts Outside the Purview of Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979 cannot claim that his regularisation be treated as effective from the date of his initial ad hoc appointment or from the date on which he became eligible for regularisation. It held that under the...

Even Genuine Parental Concern Cannot Override Major Individual's Right To Choose Life Partner: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that even genuine parental concern cannot override the constitutionally protected autonomy of a major individual to choose a life partner.The Court added that the right to choose one's partner is a facet of personal liberty and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.A bench of Justice Sandeep Jain made the observation while allowing a habeas corpus petition filed concerning a major woman who claimed to have voluntarily married the person of her...