May 9 To May 15, 2022

lavkush v. State of UPThru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko. and connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 235

Mohammad Azam Khan v. State Of UP 2022 Live Law (AB) 236

Dr Rajneesh Singh v Union of India and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 237

Akhilesh v. State of UP 2022 Live Law (AB) 238

Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. UP Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 239

Gulam Sarvar v. State of UP 2022 Live Law (AB) 240

Prakash Chandra Agrawal v. State Of UP Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Home UP Lko. And Another 2022 Live Law (AB) 241

Orders/Judgements of the week

“Had Union Minister Not Made Alleged Utterances Threatening Farmers, Lakhimpur Kheri Violence Might Not Have Happened”: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To 4 Accused

Case Title – lavkush v. State of UPThru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko. and connected matters

Citation: 2022 Live Law (AB) 235

Denying bail to 4 prime accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence incident, the High Court observed that incident might not have taken place if the Union Minister of State for Home had not made alleged utterances threatening farmers to chase them away from District Kheri.

Political persons holding high offices should make public utterances in a decent language considering its repercussions in the Society. They should not make irresponsible statements as they are required to conduct themselves befitting their status and dignity of high office which they hold,” the Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh said.

Enemy Property Case: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Samajwadi Party MLA Azam Khan

Case title – Mohammad Azam Khan v. State Of UP

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 236

Granting bail to Samajwadi Party Leader and UP MLA Azam Khan in an alleged case of grabbing Enemy Property and using it for the construction of the Mohammed Ali Jauhar University, the High Court made some stern remarks against the former Cabinet Minister in the UP Government.

Perusing the pleadings of the affidavits, submissions advanced and pleadings exchanged, the Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi remarked that it was well established that Khan was out and out for anyhow grab the property which was earmarked as Enemy Property by exploiting his position as a Cabinet Minister.

BREAKING| Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea For Fact-Finding Committee To Study “Real History” Of Taj Mahal

Case Title: Dr Rajneesh Singh v Union of India and Ors

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 237

The High Court dismissed a petition seeking the constitution of a fact-finding committee to research on the “real history” behind Taj Mahal. Petitioner disputed that Taj Mahal was a Mughal structure.

The petitioner also sought a direction to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to open the sealed doors of over 20 rooms inside the Taj Mahal premises so that the alleged controversy pertaining to the “history of Taj Mahal” can be put to rest.

So read: Are We Here To Decide Who Built Taj Mahal? Tomorrow You Will Want To Go Inside Judges’ Chambers : Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Petitioner

“Young Lawyers Advised To Take Up Such Cases”: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Undertrial In Jail For Over 11 Years

Case title – Akhilesh v. State of UP

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 238

the High Court granted bail to an undertrial prisoner who has been in jail for over 11 years in connection with an attempt to murder case. The court also gave a piece of advice to young lawyers to take up the cases of such prisoners who can’t approach courts due to their adverse pecuniary position.

The Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery also took into account the recent observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Crl.Appeal No.308/ 2022), wherein the Top Court had reiterated that long incarceration of undertrials is violation of their rights provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Sri Krishna Janambhumi Dispute: Allahabad High Court Directs Mathura Court To Decide 2 Pending Applications Within 4 Months

Case title – Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. UP Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 239

the High Court has directed a local court in Mathura to decide two applications pending before it, filed in connection with the Sri Krishna Janambhumi Dispute, within 4 months.

The Bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai issued this order on a plea made by Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another by observing thus:

The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura is directed to decide the aforesaid applications expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the affected parties, in case there is no legal impediment in deciding the aforesaid applications.”

“Nobody Dares To Depose Against Dreaded Criminals Out Of Fear”: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Atique Ahmad’s Aid In Abduction Case

Case title – Gulam Sarvar v. State of UP [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 5491 of 2019]

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 240

the High Court denied bail to the prime associate of former MP Atique Ahmad (who is currently lodged in Deoria Jail) in connection with an Abduction-Extortion case.

While doing so, the Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal also stressed that in the changing social circumstances, it has now become obvious that nobody dares to depose against the dreaded and hardened criminals out of fear.

Allahabad HC Orders Compulsory Training Of Inquiry Officers, Disciplinary Authorities Involved In Holding Departmental Inquiries

Case title – Prakash Chandra Agrawal v. State Of UP Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Dept. Of Home UP Lko. And Another

Case citations: 2022 Live Law (AB) 241

the High Court directed the Director, JTRI to prepare an appropriate program for the training of inquiry officers and disciplinary authorities to ensure compliance with UP Government Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 in conducting departmental inquiries.

The Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary was dealing with the plea of ​​one Prakash Chandra Agrawal challenging the punishment order passed against himself who was awarded censorship entry.

Weekly updates from the High Court

Allahabad HC Recalls Order Issuing Non-Bailable Warrant Against Mathura’s DM In View Of Compliance Affidavit Filed By Him

Case title – Braj Mohan Sharma And 3 Others v. Mr Navneet Chahal DM Mathura

the High Court has recalled its order issuing a non-bailable warrant against the District Magistrate of Mathura, Navneet Singh Chahal in a case of a contempt plea filed over non-compliance with the Court’s order. The order was recalled after the DM filed an affidavit stating that he had complied with the Court’s order.

The Bench of Justice Saral Srivastava had issued the warrant on April 26 and had ordered the police to produce Chahal before the Court on May 12 for ‘disrespecting’ the court’s September 2021 order.

Lakhimpur Kheri Violence: Complainant Granted 2 Weeks’ Time To File Counter Affidavit In Ashish Mishra’s Bail Plea Before Allahabad HC

the High Court granted two weeks’ time to the informant/complainant in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence case to file his counter-affidavit in bail plea moved by Prime Accused and Union Ministers’ Son, Ashish Mishra/Monu.

Mishra’s bail plea was remembered back to the High Court for fresh consideration by the Supreme Court last month while allowing the appeal filed by the victims challenging the bail order of Allahabad High Court.

Senior Advocate Ajay Mishra To Be The New Advocate General For Uttar Pradesh

Senior Advocate Ajay Mishra to be the new Advocate General for the State of Uttar Pradesh. As per the report of PTI, State Finance Minister Suresh Khanna told reporters yesterday that Ajay Kumar Mishra has been appointed as the new Advocate General of UP

This development came days after the Allahabad High Court directed the State Government to take a decision on the appointment of AG by May 16, 2022.

Funds Misappropriation Case Against Ex-MLA Mukhtar Ansari | Allahabad HC Directs DM To Conduct Physical Survey Of School

the High Court directed the District Magistrate, Mau to conduct an on-spot physical survey of the school which is at the center of a case registered against former MLA Mukhtar Ansari (presently in jail) over misappropriation of MLA Funds fund in the year 2012-13.

Essentially, an FIR was lodged last year against Ansari mentioning therein that Ansari, as an MLA, in the years 2012, 2013 & 2014, allocated Rs. 25 Lacs from his MLA fund to a school, however, when the inspection was done, it was found that the money had not been properly utilized by the said School.

Allahabad High Court Stays GST Demand On Payment Of Royalty To Conduct Mining Activity

the High Court bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh has stayed the GST demand on payment of royalty to conduct mining activity.

The petitioner/assessee has assailed the appeal order. Since the tribunal was yet to be constituted, the writ petition was entertained. The First Appeal Order arising from the earlier order under Section 73 of the UP GST Act, 2017 was also challenged. The petitioner has also challenged the ex parte order passed by the State GST authorities pursuant to a notice. Both proceedings were stated to be for the same tax period, being Financial Year 2017-18.

Allahabad High Court Puts A Stay On Issuance Of Eligibility Certificates In Favor Of Successful UPTET-2021 Candidates

The High Court put a stay on the issuance of eligibility certificates to B.Ed degree holders who have qualified for the UPTET (Primary level) Examination, 2021.

The Bench of Justice Siddharth has issued this order in a writ plea moved by Prateek Mishra and 4 others praying not to declare the result of B.Ed. Qualified candidates who appeared in the Uttar Pradesh Teacher Eligibility Test (Primary Level), 2021.

The Counsel for the Petitioners, Taniya Pandey submitted that the B.Ed. Degree holders have been declared ineligible for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in primary schools (Classes I to V) by the Rajasthan High Court in its November 2021 decision.

It was her further submission that the Rajasthan High Court has set aside the order of NCTE (National Council for Teacher Education) dated June 28, 2018, in which B.Ed degree holders were also considered eligible to teach in primary schools.


Leave a Comment