Read Time: 18 minutes
1. [Minor's Rape] The Allahabad High Court recently upheld the conviction of a man in a rape case of an 8-year-old girl. However, court converted the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to the convict to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment. While upholding the conviction, court refuted the argument that the victim's father had falsely implicated the convict. Court said, "So far as the plea of false implication, it is not natural for any father to stake the honour of his minor daughter to avenge a previous dispute, that too by falsely alleging that she has been raped". The order was passed in a criminal appeal against conviction and sentence.
Bench: Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rajendra Kumar
Case Title: Sonu @Pinku v State of UP
Click here to read more
2. [Breach Of Longstanding Consensual Relationship] The Allahabad High Court recently quashed the entire proceedings in a rape case against a man accused of raping a woman on false promise of marriage. Court noted that the accused and the victim were known to each other for more than 15 years and they had been in active physical relationship with the approval of the parents of the victim for more than 8 years. The bench pointed out that in the instant case, since the relationship between the parties was of consensual nature having an approval of the family, and the initial promise by the accused was not false, therefore, any subsequent breach of such relationship would not amount to the offence of rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Bench: Justice Anish Kumar Gupta
Case Title: Jiyaullah v. State of UP and Another
3. [Banke Bihari Temple] The Allahabad High Court has recently directed the Tehsildar/Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Chata, District Mathura to enter the name of Mandir Bihari Ji Virajman Mandir against the plot which was earlier recorded as a graveyard in 2004. Court passed the order in a writ petition moved by Sri Bihari Ji Seva Trust alleging that initially documented under the name of Mandir Banke Bihari Ji Maharaj in state revenue records, the ownership of the temple land i.e. plot no. 1081 situated in Shahpur village in Chhata tehsil of Mathura district underwent illegal alteration in 2004 and was registered as a graveyard. The petitioner claimed that one Bhola Khan Pathan along with his agents were instrumental in the process.
Bench: Justice Saurabh Srivastava
Case Title: Sri Bihari Ji Seva Trust v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others
4. [Jauhar University Land] The Allahabad High Court has recently granted bail to former circle officer Aley Hasan Khan in all 26 cases registered against him at Rampur, Uttar Pradesh for alleged illegal grabbing of land for Mohammad Ali Jauhar University in collusion with Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan. Court noted that though the allegations were that Aley Hasan Khan, who was working as Dy Superintendent of Police when the Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar University was established, forced the residents of the area to transfer their respective lands in favor of the said university, he was neither the founder nor the trustee or member of Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust which runs the University. Court also took into account the fact that the main co-accused Mohd. Azam Khan, who is the founder/trustee of the Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust which runs the University, has already been granted bail.
Bench: Justice Raj Beer Singh
Case Title: Ex C.O. Aley Hasan Kha V. State of UP and connected matters
5. [Mental Health Assessment System For POCSO Victims] The Allahabad High Court has issued a direction to the Judicial Training & Research Institute, Lucknow to create a standardized evaluation system/line of enquiry to determine the mental condition of the victims of offences under the POCSO Act, 2012, and to provide for their rehabilitation. Court asked the JTRI, Lucknow to do so in consultation with the State Government, institutions of higher legal learning, institutions of higher research and education, institutions of special expertise like NIMHANS, Child Welfare Committees (CWCs) and other experts in the field. The order was passed in a bail application in a case where after lodging of the FIR and arrest of the accused persons, the victim, whose statements under Sections 161 and 164 had been recorded and a medical exam had been done which fully corroborated the prosecution story of abduction and rape, turned hostile.
Bench: Justice Ajay Bhanot
Case Title: Siddhant @ Aashu v. State of UP and 3 Others
6. [Hapur Incident] The Allahabad High Court on Monday last week expressed its hope that the investigating authorities shall conduct the investigation into the incident of alleged Police violence on lawyers at Hapur on August 29, 2023, in a fair, transparent, and impartial manner. Court added,"It goes without saying that the FIR lodged at the instance of aggrieved advocates will be duly examined and investigated in a fair and impartial manner". The bench made the observation in light of the claims of the Bar Associations/Bar Council that the preliminary report of SIT was not satisfactory. The matter will be next heard on October 12, 2023.
Bench: Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Case Title: In Re v. State of UP
7. [2005 Ayodhya Terror Attack Case] The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to four men who were serving life sentences in connection with a terrorist attack that occurred 18 years ago at the Ram Janmabhoomi site in Ayodhya. Moreover, court ordered that their appeals, challenging the life sentence awarded to them, be posted for hearing on December 4, 2023. Shakeel Ahmed, Mohammad Naseem, Asif Iqbal @ Faroq, and Dr. Irfan moved the high court seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail. On July 5, 2005, five heavily armed terrorists attacked the premises of 'Ram Janmbhoomi Sthal'. In the confrontation with the security forces, all five terrorists and one civilian died.
Bench: Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
Case Title: Shakeel Ahmed v. State of U.P. and Connected matters
8. [Maintenance In Marriage] The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that "so long as a marriage survives, it remains the duty of the earning spouse to protect life, liberty, and dignity of the other". Court said that even in an estranged marriage situation, certain minimum amount has to be provided by the earning party to ensure protection of life, liberty and dignity of the other.
Bench: Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Rajendra Kumar
Case Title: Santosh Kumar v. Gayatri Devi
9. [Cost On Petitioners, Their Counsel] The Allahabad High Court recently came down heavily upon two petitioners and their counsel in a writ petition filed challenging an FIR against the petitioners. noted that although the petitioners' one petition challenging an FIR against them registered under Sections 363 and 366 IPC had been rejected by the high court on September 6, 2023, they filed a fresh petition just five days later "challenging the same FIR. Court said, "It is cheating qua the client as well as the Court. It is established that without taking leave from the Court, no second writ petition could be filed but the petitioner has got an audacity to file successive writ petition for the same cause of action".
Bench: Justice Rahul Chaturvedi and Justice Vivek Kumar Singh
Case Title: Smt. Jasoda And Another v. State of UP and 3 Others
10. [PwD Category In NEET PG-2023] The Allahabad High Court last week directed the Ministry of Ayush to take a decision with regard to lowering the percentile criteria for the category of PwD (Physically handicapped) candidates in the NEET (PG)-2023 Examination. Court directed the Ministry to do so by September 29, 2023, in consultation with the Central Council of Indian Medicine in terms of the proviso to Regulation 8(iii) of the Notification dated December 7, 2018, issued by the Council. Court clarified that if the Ministry decides to lower the percentile criteria, then the benefit of the decision, if any, shall be ensured to all the students.
Bench: Justice Pankaj Bhatia
Case Title: Waliullah v. Union Of India Thru. Chief Secy. Ministry Of Ayush New Delhi And 3 Others
11. [Monuments In Lucknow] In the Public Interest Litigation raising the issue of preservation of the protected monuments situated in and around the city of Lucknow, the Allahabad High Court recently directed the State Government as well as the city Municipal Corporation to submit an affidavit of the steps taken to remove the encroachments/streamline the civic condition and protect the monuments. As per the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), there are 364 such sites in Lucknow.
Bench: Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Om Prakash Shukla
Case Title: Syed Mohammad Haider Rizvi v. Union Of India Thr.Secy.Deptt.Of Culture New Delhi And Others
Please Login or Register
