Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 20 To January 26, 2025

Neeraj Kumar v. Smt. Shradha Goel 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 20

Rekha And 3 Ors. vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 21

Alka Singh Chauhan v. Shakti Singh 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 22

2025 LiveLaw (AB) 23

Amar Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Administration Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 24

Chandrakant Tripathi vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 25

Nishant Roy vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 26

Mukhtiyar Ahmad vs. State Of Up And 6 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 27

2025 LiveLaw (AB) 28

In Re- Procedure To Be Followed In Hearing Of Criminal Appeals vs. State of U.P 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 29

M/S Annapurna Construction Co. vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 30

Anup Singh v. Smt. Jyoti Chandrabhan Singh 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 31

Dilip Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 32

Pramod vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 33

Faraheem Qureshi vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 34

Jagriti And 2 Others vs. State Of Up And 6 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 35

Shubhra Rai vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 36

Raj Pal Singh Dishwar vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 37

ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK

Refusal Of Husband To Lead Evidence Not Sufficient For HC To Extend Further Opportunity To Adduce Evidence: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Neeraj Kumar v. Smt. Shradha Goel 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 20 [FIRST APPEAL No. - 880 of 2017]

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 20

The Allahabad High Court has held that decision of the Trial Court/ Family Court cannot be set aside because of failure on part of the husband in leading evidence when there is no other infirmity in the order.

The bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh held

“Refusal/ failure on part of the husband to lead any evidence would not be sufficient for this Court to extend a further opportunity to the husband to adduce evidence when no procedural infirmity is shown in the proceedings of the trial court.”

S. 319 CrPC | Degree Of Satisfaction To Summon Additional Accused Must Be Higher Than The Standards Required At Framing Of Charges Stage: Allahabad HC

Case title - Rekha And 3 Ors. vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 21

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 21

The Allahabad High Court has observed that after the commencement of the trial, the degree of satisfaction required to be recorded by the trial court while summoning any other person as an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC should be more than the standards needed for the stage of framing of charges.

A bench of Justice Manoj Bajaj added that the discretionary power u/s 319 CrPC should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection and that the evidence on record must strongly suggest more than a "prima facie" case against such a person and his involvement in the commission of the crime.

Supreme Court Order Expediting Divorce Proceedings Cannot Be Taken To Deprive Wife Of Her Right To Contest: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Alka Singh Chauhan v. Shakti Singh [FIRST APPEAL No. - 473 of 2019]

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 22

The Allahabad High Court has held that order passed by the Supreme Court expediting divorce proceedings cannot be a ground to deprive the wife of her right to contest divorce proceedings.

Observing that the Family Court had not fairly adjudicated the divorce proceedings, the bench of Justice Ashwini Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh held

“The undue hot haste in which the Court has proceeded cannot be approved of. Although there was a direction by the Supreme Court to expedite the proceedings and conclude it within six months but such direction was to resist any uncalled for adjournment claimed by the parties. The order of the Supreme Court cannot be construed as depriving the wife to contest the proceedings.”

Allahabad HC Limits UP Police 'Unfettered' Power To Open History Sheets; Mandates Reasoned Orders, Objection Consideration & Yearly Review

Case Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 23

In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court effectively tossed out the "unfettered powers" of the Uttar Pradesh Police to open Class-B history sheets against citizens without observing the principles of natural justice.

For context, as per the UP Police Regulation, Class-B history sheets are opened for “confirmed and professional criminals, who commit a crime other than dacoity, burglary, cattle theft and theft from railway goods, wagons, e.g., professional cheats and other experts for whom criminal, personal files are maintained by the Criminal Investigation Department.

Actions Not Malicious: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Addl Private Secretary Sacked For Unintentionally Forwarding WhatsApp Message Against CM

Case Title: Amar Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Administration Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 24 [WRIT - A No. - 9071 of 2024]

Case Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 24

The Allahabad High Court haS quashed the termination order of Additional Private Secretary in the State Secretariat of Uttar Pradesh, who was sacked for allegedly forwarding a WhatsApp message which is stated to have contained objectionable remarks concerning the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister of the state.

The order was quashed on grounds of lack of evidence to establish intention to harm the reputation of the government.

Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Man Facing Charges Of Giving False Evidence In A Murder Trial For Past 32 Years

Case title - Chandrakant Tripathi vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 25

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 25

The Allahabad High Court quashed a complaint case pending against a man for the past 32 years where he was facing charges under Sections 194, 211 IPC for giving false evidence during a murder trial.

Granting relief to the accused, a bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh noted that it is nearly impossible to hold a fair trial of the applicant-accused after such a long time-lapse, and the same would be a sheer waste of public time and money apart from causing harassment to the applicant-accused.

'Cyber Crime Like A Silent Virus Costing Society More Than Money': Allahabad HC Denies Bail To 'Digital Arrest' Accused

Case title - Nishant Roy vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 26

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 26

Taking note of the surge in cybercrimes across the nation, the Allahabad High Court observed that cybercrime in our country is like a silent virus, and it has affected an uncountable number of innocent victims who have been defrauded of their hard-earned money.

The Court also noted that cybercrime affects people across the nation, irrespective of religion, region, education, or class and that such crimes must be curbed.

Religious Places Are For Offering Prayers, Loudspeaker Use Not A Right As It Often Causes Nuisance To Residents: Allahabad HC

Case title - Mukhtiyar Ahmad vs. State Of Up And 6 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 27

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 27

The Allahabad High Court observed that religious places are primarily for offering prayers to the divinity, and thus, the use of loudspeakers cannot be claimed as a matter of right, especially when such use often creates a nuisance for the residents.

A bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh observed this while dismissing a writ plea moved by one Mukhtiyar Ahmad seeking a direction from the state authorities to permit the installation of loudspeakers on a Masjid.

Youth Attracted To Live-In Relations Which Lack Social Sanction, High Time That We Save Moral Values In Society: Allahabad HC

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 28

The Allahabad High Court observed that live-in relationships have no social sanction. Still, the youth are attracted to such relations, and it is high time that we found some framework and solution to save moral values in society.

A bench of Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava added that we live in a changing society, where moral values and the normal conduct of the young generation in the family, society, or at their workplace are changing swiftly.

Magistrate/Sessions Court Has No Jurisdiction To Grant Bail To Accused If HC Issues NBW In Appeals Against Acquittal Or Conviction: Allahabad HC [FB]

Case title - In Re- Procedure To Be Followed In Hearing Of Criminal Appeals vs. State of U.P 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 29

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 29

A full bench of the Allahabad High Court has held that where the High Court has consciously issued a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of an accused, against whose acquittal/conviction an appeal has been moved, the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge, as the case may be, would have no jurisdiction to release such person on bail.

A bench of Justices Sangeeta Chandra, Pankaj Bhatia, and Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan reasoned that the fate of the accused or appellant/convict would be governed as per the terms of the order of the High Court under which non-bailable warrants have been issued.

Writ Of Mandamus Can Be Issued In Contractual Matters Only When Outstanding Payments Are Admitted, Not Otherwise: Allahabad HC

Case Title: M/S Annapurna Construction Co. vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 30 [Writ C 32144 of 2021]

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 30

The Allahabad High Court has held that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to enter contractual unless exceptional circumstances are present, which include respondents agreeing to the outstanding dues. It held that a writ of mandamus can be issued in such cases.

In brief, the Petitioner won the contract to construct a residence under the Basic Services to the Urban Poor Yojana at Kishanpur, Kanpur Nagar, under 'Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission'. The Petitioner completed the work within the stipulated time, and possession was handed over.

Place Of Marriage Relevant Jurisdiction Under Hindu Marriage Act, Divorce Petition Can't Be Filed Where Reception Was Held: Allahabad HC

Case Title: Anup Singh v. Smt. Jyoti Chandrabhan Singh [FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 29 of 2025]

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 31

The Allahabad High Court has held that place of marriage reception is not relevant for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction on the Family Court under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Section 19(i) of the Act confers jurisdiction under the Act upon a court within whose local limits the marriage between the parties was solemnized.

S. 321 CrPC | Prosecution Can't Be Withdrawn Merely On Govt Issuing An Order, Public Prosecutor Must Apply His Mind: Allahabad HC

Case title - Dilip Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 32

Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 32

The Allahabad High Court has observed that withdrawal of prosecution under Section 321 CrPC is not permissible merely because the Government issues an order in this regard.

It added that the public prosecutor must apply his mind by mentioning in his application that he is satisfied that it has been made in good faith and in the interest of public policy and justice.

A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal made this observation while upholding an order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti, dismissing the state's application under Section 321 CrPC for withdrawal of prosecution against the applicant in an extortion case.

Woman Allegedly Raped, Impregnated By Own Brother, Father | 'Unforgivable Betrayal Of Blood & Trust': Allahabad HC Denies Bail

Case title - Pramod vs. State of U.P. 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 33

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 33

Denying bail to father-son duo accused of committing rape against real daughter/sister and impregnating her, the Allahabad High Court last week termed it a case of an unforgivable betrayal of blood and trust.

“I find that facts of this case and allegation of rape on victim by her real brother and father are very rare and heinous in nature…The hands of father and brother meant to protect the dignity of his daughter and sister became weapons of her destruction,” a bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh remarked.

Insulting Or Attacking A Political Party Not Associated With Any Religion Or Its Belief Won't Attract S. 295-A IPC: Allahabad HC

Case title - Faraheem Qureshi vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 34

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 34

The Allahabad High Court has held that merely insulting a particular political party or a group that is not inextricably associated with any religion or its belief will not attract the ingredients of Section 295-A IPC as it does not amount to outraging the religious feeling or belief of a class of citizens.

A bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal also added that this provision won't be attracted if a person insults a religion unwittingly, carelessly, or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage religious feelings.

Citing Mother's Conduct Of 'Fleeing' With Another Man Sans Divorce, Allahabad HC Hands Over Minor's Custody To Father

Case title - Jagriti And 2 Others vs. State Of Up And 6 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 35

Case citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 35

The Allahabad High Court directed that custody of a minor child be handed over to the father, citing the mother's alleged actions of eloping with another man without seeking a formal divorce from her husband.

A bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava observed that the future of the minor child, a budding citizen of a glorious country, cannot be permitted to be taken care of by 'such a mother' who fled away with a person without divorcing her husband.

Consider Sacrifices Of Defence Personnel; Marital Discord No Ground: Allahabad HC Rejects Teacher's Plea Seeking Mid-Term Transfer

Case title - Shubhra Rai vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 36

Case citation : 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 36

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a female teacher requesting a mid-term intra-district transfer as it emphasised that marital discord can't be a strong enough ground for seeking transfer.

While rejecting her plea, the Court highlighted the example of uniformed personnel who serve the nation under some of the harshest conditions.

“Save a thought for our men and women in uniform, who serve in the most inhospitable terrains under most trying conditions. If our uniformed personnel start vying for cozy home postings, who will protect the nation's sovereignty. Teachers should remember the inspiring lives and conduct of our uniformed personnel who put service of the nation before satisfaction of personal comfort and welfare”, a bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed.

Allahabad High Court Orders Reinstatement Of ADGC (Criminal) Accused Of Making Comments Against Mahatma Gandhi

Case title – Raj Pal Singh Dishwar vs. State Of Up And 3 Others 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 37

Case Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 37

The Allahabad High Court last week ordered the reinstatement of one Raj Pal Singh Dishwar to the post of Assistant District Government Counsel (Criminal), whose services were dispensed with for allegedly making some objectionable comments against the 'Father of Nation' (Mahatma Gandhi).

A bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Kshitij Shailendra noted that the entire action against the petitioner appeared to be full of malice.