Instagram Chats Alone Cannot Prove ‘Living In Adultery’: Allahabad High Court In Maintenance Case

 In the present case, the sole foundation of the revisionist's claim of adultery is digital evidence in the form of Instagram chats. This brings the Court to the crucial aspect of the admissibility and evidentiary value of electronic records. {Para 12}

13. It is a settled proposition of law that the admissibility of electronic evidence must be tested strictly at the anvil of Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In the landmark decision of Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC, a three-judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified the mandatory nature of this statutory requirement.

14. It was further reiterated in the said judgment, following the ratio in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer 2014 (10) SCC 473, that the statutory certificate is a mandatory condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of an electronic record. Secondary evidence of electronic records is admissible only if led in the strict manner stated in the statute, and not otherwise.

15. The necessity for such strict verification stems from the inherent vulnerabilities of digital data. As observed by the Apex Court in various pronouncements dealing with electronic evidence and private investigations, there is an ever-present danger regarding the authenticity of such material.

16. Applying these settled legal principles to the facts at hand, it is evident that the Instagram chats produced by the revisionist are not supported by the mandatory statutory certification. In the absence of such a certificate, it would be entirely incorrect in law to treat this electronic evidence as admissible.

17. Even if, for the sake of argument, the contents of the unverified chats were to be perused, mere text messages on a social media platform, without corroborative evidence of physical intimacy or cohabitation, are thoroughly insufficient to legally establish that the wife is continuously "living in adultery". The burden lies heavily upon the revisionist to prove a continuous adulterous lifestyle, which he has failed to discharge.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7800 of 2025

Court No. - 85

HON'BLE JAI KRISHNA UPADHYAY, J.

Dated: September 29, 2026.

Print Page

Allahabad HC has deprecated filing of multiple non-compulsive litigation for maintenance by wife when she is unable to maintain herself

On the one hand, the petitioner claims that she is unable to maintain herself and she cannot afford to purchase even the basic necessities for survival and on the other hand, she is multiplying non-compulsive litigation against her husband. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and a complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act claiming maintenance. Although she had a legal right to institute numerous proceedings claiming maintenance under various statutory provisions but when she claims to be unable to maintain herself and afford even the basic necessities for survival, it does not appear to be proper to multiply non-compulsive litigation. Further, non filing of the suit for restitution of conjugal rights or divorce indicates that the petitioner is interested only in claiming maintenance from her husband before various fora and not in settling her disputes either way by restitution of her matrimonial status or by dissolution of her marriage. {Para 9}

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

LUCKNOW

MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4292 of 2026

Shashi Gupta Vs State Of U.P. 

Coram: HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

Citation: 2026 AHC LKO 55690.

Dated: August 11, 2026

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Could police expect the complainant to first produce electronic or other corroborative evidence before registering an FIR?

 The Call Detail Records, location records, subscriber details and other electronic evidence, if legally obtainable and available, can be collected by the investigating agency after registration of the FIR. It was not proper for the police to treat the non-production of such material by the prosecutrix as a reason to refuse registration of the FIR. The burden of conducting a lawful investigation cannot be shifted upon the prosecutrix at the stage when she approaches the police with information disclosing cognizable offences. {Para 53}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 18961 of 2026

Decided On: 06.08.2026

Arpit Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Chandra Dhari Singh and Tarun Saxena, JJ.

Author: Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

Citation: 2026:AHC:168404-DB),MANU/UP/1934/2026

Print Page

Allahabad HC explains what documents are to be sent to accused at pre-cognizance stage as per S 223 of BNSS

 Therefore, the procedural drill would be this way: A complaint is presented before the Magistrate under Section 223 of the BNSS; on presentation of the complaint, it would be the duty of the Magistrate/concerned Court to examine the complainant on oath, which would be his sworn statement and examine the witnesses present if any, and the substance of such examination should be reduced into writing. The question of taking of cognizance would not arise at this juncture. The magistrate has to, in terms of the proviso, issue a notice to the accused who is given an opportunity of being heard. Therefore, notice shall be issued to the accused at that stage and after hearing the accused, take cognizance and regulate its procedure thereafter. {Para 10}

11. The proviso indicates that an accused should have an opportunity of being heard. Opportunity of being heard would not mean an empty formality. Therefore, the notice that is sent to the accused in terms of proviso to subsection (1) of Section 223 of the BNSS shall append to it the complaint; the sworn statement; statement of witnesses if any, for the accused to appear and submit his case before taking of cognizance. In the considered view of this Court, it is the clear purport of Section 223 of BNSS 2023.

 In the High Court of Allahabad

(Before Rajeev Singh, J.)

Prateek Agarwal  Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.

 Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another 

Application U/S 482 No. - 10390 of 2024

Decided on November 26, 2024

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine All 8212

Print Page

Allahabad HC: The court must issue notice to accused at pre-cognizance stage as per S 223 of BNSS in the case of Drugs and Cosmetics Act

A close look of the summoning order would reveal that there is no recital about the fact whether the applicants have been put to notice at the pre-cognizance stage or not. In Prateek Agarwal (supra), the following was observed.-

"8. Proviso of Sub Section (1) of Section 223 of the B.N.S.S. mandates that a Magistrate while taking cognizance of an offence, on a complaint, shall examine upon oath, the complainant and the witnesses present, if any, and reduce it into writing. The Proviso further mandates that no cognizance of an offence shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving an opportunity to the accused of being heard. Section 227 of the B.N.S.S. deals with the issuance of process which is akin to Section 204 of the Cr.P.C. {Para 8}

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18480 of 2025

M/S Associated Biotech And 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

Dated: September 12, 2025

Print Page

Allahabad HC set aside a summoning order passed by the Special Judge under the SC/ST Act because no opportunity of hearing was given under Section 223(1) BNSS

It is further contended that as per proviso of Section 223(1) of BNSS-2023, no cognizance of an offence shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard but he has failed to do so. Section 223(1) of BNSS-2023 reads as under:-

" 223. Examination of complainant. (1) A Magistrate having jurisdiction while taking cognizance of an offence on complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the witnesses present, if any, and the substance of such examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the witnesses, and also by the Magistrate:Provided that no cognizance of an offence shall be taken by the Magistrate without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard: Provided further that when the complaint is made in writing, the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses-(a) if a public servant acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties or a Court has made the complaint; or (b) if the Magistrate makes over the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under section 212:Provided also that if the Magistrate makes over the case to another Magistrate under section 212 after examining the complainant and the witnesses, the latter Magistrate need not re-examine them.

(2) XXXX"

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the appeal but did not dispute the legal position of law.

6. Upon hearing the rival submissions and perusal of the record, this Court finds that the learned Special Judge has passed the impugned summoning order without giving opportunity of hearing.

7. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal stands allowed. The impugned summoning order dated 25.04.2025, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST) Act Sonbhadra, is hereby quashed and set-aside. The matter is remanded to the court below to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10890 of 2025

Mekala Chandra Shekar And 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Author: SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

Dated: November 25, 2025

Print Page

Guide for Session Judges for appreciating evidence of CA Reports, FSL Report, DNA report and all scientific experts report in Sessions Trials

A forensic report often enters the courtroom with an aura of certainty. Once the Chemical Analyser or FSL states that blood matches, DNA corresponds, or a sample confirms a prosecution theory, the natural temptation is to treat the report as near-conclusive proof. The decision of the Allahabad High Court in Najeeruddin v. State of U.P. is a powerful reminder that criminal courts must resist that temptation. A forensic report may be on record, and may even be formally admissible under Section 293 CrPC, yet it may still be legally unsafe to rely upon if the prosecution has not proved the source material, the chain of connection, and the accused has not been confronted with the incriminating contents under Section 313 CrPC.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Direction For Re-Recording Of Victim's Statement U/S 183 BNSS Can Be Given Only In 'Exceptional Circumstances

Ordinarily no routine direction for second statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. can be given but under exceptional circumstances. High Court in exercise of it’s extraordinary jurisdiction, if justified to rectify injustice, may issue directions for recording second statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S. but it cannot be exercised as a general rule where victim alleges that her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. was not read over to her or that she was not given an opportunity to confirm its correctness. The High Court can in appropriate cases exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to direct a fresh recording of statement before the Magistrate and the power is not a routine or an automatic power but is exercised by High Court or Supreme Court to prevent abuse of process, to secure ends of justice or rectify grave procedural irregularities that could lead to miscarriage of justice.{Para 16}

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3822 of 2026

Kirti Verma Vs  State of U.P.

HON'BLE RAJIV GUPTA, J.

HON'BLE ACHAL SACHDEV, J.

Per: Hon’ble Achal Sachdev, J.

Judgement Delivered on 26.02.2026

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Under which circumstances, the court should release accused in second bail application?

This is a second bail application. First bail application, of the

applicant, being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43350 of

2024, was rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024. {Para 1}.

6. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of

accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction

and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of

tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without

commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out.

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6085 of 2025

Applicant :- Shriram Sahu

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47880.

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Ordinary residence of child for the purpose of S 9 of Guardian and wards Act is mixed question of law and fact and it can not be decided in application for rejection of plaint

 In the instant case, the factum of 'ordinary residence' of the minor is a disputed question of fact and thus, the question whether the Court at Ghaziabad has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 is a mixed question of law and fact. The aforesaid question cannot be determined without holding an enquiry into the factual aspects of the controversy and without framing a distinctive issue in this regard. The scope of scrutiny at the stage of consideration of an application under Order VII, Rule 11 of Civil Procedure Code 1908 is confined only to the averments made in the petition. Thus, the question whether the Court has territorial jurisdiction being mixed question of law and fact cannot be decided by way of an application under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. {Para 31}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

First Appeal No. 373 of 2024

Decided On: 15.05.2024

Dheeraj Vs. Chetna Goswami

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.K. Birla and Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, JJ.

Author: Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, J.

 Citation: 2024:AHC:87786-DB, MANU/UP/1908/2024

Print Page

Allahabad HC Issues Safeguards Against S. 498A Misuse : No Arrest During 2 Months' Cooling-Off Period After FIR Registration

Thus assesing the totality of the circumstances, object and the allegation of misuse of this piece of legislation in a shape of Section 498A IPC, the Court is proposing the safeguards after taking the guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (Supra) keeping in view the growing tendency in the masses to nail the husband and all family members by a general and sweeping allegations. {Para 48}

49. Thus, It is directed that:—

(i) No arrest or police action to nab the named accused persons shall be made after lodging of the FIR or complaints without concluding the “Cooling-Period” which is two months from the lodging of the FIR or the complaint. During this “Cooling-Period”, the matter would be immediately referred to Family Welfare Committe(hereinafter referred to as FWC) in the each district.

(ii) Only those cases which would be transmitted to FWC in which Section 498-A IPC along with, no injury 307 and other sections of the IPC in which the imprisonment is less than 10 years.

(iii) After lodging of the complaint or the FIR, no action should take place without concluding the “Cooling-Period” of two months. During this “Cooling-Period”, the matter may be referred to Family Welfare Committee in each districts.

(iv) Every district shall have at least one or more FWC (depending upon the geographical size and population of that district constituted under the District Legal Aid Services Authority) comprising of at least THREE MEMBERS. Its constitution and function shall be reviewed periodically by the District & Sessions Judge/Principal Judge, Family Court of that District, who shall be the Chairperson or Co-chairperson of that district at Legal Service Authority.

(v) The said FWC shall comprise of the following members:—

(a) a young mediator from the Mediation Centre of the district or young advocate having the practices up to five years or senior most student of Vth year, Government Law College or the State University or N.L.Us. having good academic track record and who is public spirited young man, OR;

(b) well acclaimed and recognized social worker of that district having clean antecedant, OR;

(c) retired judicial officers residing in or nearby district, who can devote time for the object of the proceeding OR;

(d) educated wives of senior judicial or administrative officers of the district.

(vi) The member of the FWC shall never be called as a witness.

(vii) Every complaint or application under Section 498A IPC and other allied sections mentioned above, be immediately referred to Family Welfare Committee by the concerned Magistrate. After receiving the said complaint or FIR, the Committee shall summon the contesting parties along with their four senior elderly persons to have personal interaction and would try to settle down the issue/misgivings between them within a period of two months from its lodging.

The contesting parties are obliged to appear before the Committee with their four elderly persons (maximum) to have a serious deliberation between them with the aid of members of the Committee.

(viii) The Committee after having proper deliberations, would prepare a vivid report and would refer to the concerned Magistrate/police authorties to whom such complaints are being lodged after expiry of two months by inserting all factual aspects and their opinion in the matter.

(ix) Continue deliberation before the Committee, the police officers shall themselves to avoid any arrest or any coercive action pursuant to the applications or complaint against the named accused persons. However, the Investigating Officer shall continue to have a peripheral investigation into the matter namely preparing a medical report, injury report, the statements of witnesses.

(x) The said report given by the Committee shall be under the consideration of I.O. or the Magistrate on its own merit and thereafter suitable action should be taken by them as per the provision of Code of Criminal Procedure after expiry of the “Cooling-Period” of two months.

(xi) Legal Services Aid Committee shall impart such basic training as may be considered necessary to the members of Family Welfare Committee from time to time(not more than one week).

(xii) Since, this is noble work to cure abrasions in the society where tempos of the contesting parties are very high that they would melow down the heat between them and try to resolve the misgivings and misunderstanding between them. Since, this is a job for public at large, social work, they are acting on a pro bono basis or basic minimum honrarium as fixed by the District & Sessions Judge of every district.

(xiii) The investigation of such FIRs or complaint containing Section 498A IPC and other allied sections as mentioned above, shall be investigated by dynamic Investigating Officers whose integrity is certified after specialized training not less than one week to handle and investigate such matrimonal cases with utmost sincerity and transparancy.

(xiv) When settlement is reached between the parties, it would be open for the District & Sessions Judge and other senior judicial officers nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case.

50. At the cost of repetition, it is made clear that after lodging of the F.I.R. or the complaint case without exhausting the “Cooling-Period” of two months, no arrest or any coercive action shall be taken against the husband or his family members in order to derail the proceedings before the Family Welfare Committee.

 In the High Court of Allahabad

(Before Rahul Chaturvedi, J.)

Criminal Revision No. - 1126 of 2022

Mukesh Bansal Vs  State of U.P. and Another 

Decided on June 13, 2022

Citation: 2022 SCC OnLine All 395 : (2022) 4 All LJ 452 : (2022) 120 ACC 441 : 2022 Cri LJ 2841 : (2022) 3 HLR 399 : ILR (2022) 6 All 1112

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Anticipatory Bail Application U/S. 482 BNSS Maintainable Even For NDPS Offences In UP

Upon applicability of aforesaid judgments, it is evident that by virtue of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, a different intention to continue the repealed provisions is required to be specifically stated in the subsequent enactment, failing which, the provisions of proviso to Article 254(2) would be applicable whereby in case of any repugnance or difference with subsequent enactment, the law made by Parliament would prevail. {Para 47}

48. Upon applicability of aforesaid judgments, it is thus evident as has been observed herein above that there is no specific intention indicated in the subsequent enactment of BNSS 2023 to continue with the State amendment made by means of Act No.4 of 2019 and even in terms of proviso to Article 254(2) of the Constitution of Idia, there being a considerable difference in the provisions of anticipatory bail between Act No.4 of 2019 and Section 482 BNSS 2023, in the considered opinion of this court, it is the provisions of re-enacted Section 482 BNSS 2023, which shall prevail.

49. From perusal of differences in provisions of anticipatory bailincorporated vide Act No. 4 of 2019 and Section 482 BNSS 2023, it is evident that Parliament made a conscious decision to do away with the prohibitions indicated in Section 438(6) Cr.P.C. particularly since it would be deemed that Parliament was aware of provisions incorporated vide Act No.4 of 2019 by virtue of deeming fiction and therefore the re-enacted provisions can be said to have been deliberately obliterated by Parliamentbwhile enacting Section 482 BNSS 2023.

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S

438 CR.P.C. No. - 447 of 2025

 Sudhir @ Sudhir Kumar Chaurasia Vs State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Ministry Of Home And 3 Others

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34988.

Print Page

Whether a woman can be prosecuted for Gang Rape?

 However, going through the amended provisions of Section 375 IPC & 376 IPC, the question, whether a female can commit the offence of rape is itself clear by the non-ambiguous language of section 375 of IPC which specifically states that the act of rape can only be done by a 'man' and not by "any woman". Therefore, a woman cannot commit rape. But looking through again the amended provision of Section 376-D IPC, which is a distinct and separate offence of Gang Rape-according to which "Where a woman is raped by 'one or more persons' constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed to have committed the offence of rape and shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and with fine". Thus, from the language used in Section 376-D IPC, it is seen that in order to establish an offence under Section 376-D IPC, the prosecution has to adduce evidence to indicate that one or more persons had acted in concert and in such an event, if rape had been committed by even one, all the accused will be guilty irrespective of the fact that victim had been raped by one or more of them. In other words this provision embodies a principle of joint liability and the essence of that liability is the existence of common intention that common intention presupposes prior concert which may be determined from the conduct of offenders revealed during the course of action. In such cases, there must be criminal sharing, marking out a certain measure of jointness in the commission of offence. The term "person" used in the Section should not be construed in a narrow sense. Section 11 I.P.C. defines 'person' as it includes any company or association or body of persons whether incorporated or not. The word "person" is also defined in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary in two ways: firstly, it is defined as "an individual human being" or "a man, woman, or child"; and, secondly, as "the living body of a human being". As such, a women can not commit the offense of rape but if she facilitated the act of rape with a group of people then she may be prosecuted for Gang Rape in view of the amended provisions. Unlike man, a woman can also be held guilty of sexual offences. A woman can also be held guilty of gang rape if she has facilitated the act of rape with a group of person. {Para 11}

Ratio: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 319--Summoning order--To face trial under Sections 376D and 212 I.P.C.--Argument that woman could not commit rape and therefore applicant could not be prosecuted for gang rape found to be not correct in view of amended provisions of Sections 375 to 376E of I.P.C.--If applicant facilitated act of rape with a group of people then she might have been prosecuted for gang rape in view of amended provisions--Woman could also be held guilty of sexual offences as well as gang rape in case of her facilitating act of rape with group of person--In view of facts and law laid down by Apex Court the court found no scope for interference in impugned order passed by trial court at such stage--Application dismissed.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Application U/S. 482 No. 39234 of 2022

Decided On: 13.02.2023

Suneeta Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.

Citation:  MANU/UP/0211/2023.

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Revisional Court Can't Assume Jurisdiction To Reject O.21 R.97 Application When It Is Pending Before Executing Court

In the instant case the revisional court had assumed the jurisdiction of executing court and dismissed the application filed under Order XXI Rule 97, though observing that the issue of res judicata should have been decided first. The revisional court at the most could have remanded the matter with certain directions, it cannot assume the role of a executing court while exercising revisional jurisdiction, as the order dated 16.05.2024 does not fall in the category of case decided. {Para 33}

34. After giving thoughtful consideration, I find that the revisional court had exceeded its jurisdiction by dismissing the application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 by the petitioner before the executing court while exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC. However, the executing court has also failed in its endeavour to decide the execution case pending before it since the year 2014, and after framing the issue of res judicata had postponed the matter to be decided at the final stage.

35. In such a case where it is an admitted fact that the property was transferred during pendency of the suit and petitioner is a transferee pendente lite and hit by provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, the executing court should have, at the very outset, proceeded to pass the order in pursuance of Rule 102 CPC.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Matters Under Article 227 No. 11807 of 2024

Decided On: 11.03.2025

Santosh Awasthi Vs. Urmila Jain

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.

Citation:  MANU/UP/0397/2025,- 2025:AHC:35146.

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Pay and Recover principle still be applicable to Motor accident claim petition for insurance policies taken after 01.04.2022 notwithstanding deletion of proviso in Amended Act,

 CONCLUSION

38. The Court, therefore, holds that mere omission of proviso attached to sub-section (4) of Section 149 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 after its replacement by Section 150 of Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 (32 of 2019), neither takes away the liability of the insurer to pay the claimants nor its right to recover the said amount from the owner. The law to this effect remains intact and unaffected by Amendment Act, 2019 and, hence, insurer shall continue to indemnify the owner's risk in relation to accidents taking place after 01.04.2022 and "PAY & RECOVER" principle will still continue to govern the field advancing social object of the Statute protecting third party interest. Principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Swaran Singh and others, MANU/SC/0021/2004 : 2004:INSC:4 : JT 2004 (1) SC 109 has not lost its significance and binding effect despite omission of proviso. Held accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

First Appeal From Order Nos. 1780 of 2024, 1776 of 2024, 1777 of 2024 and 1789 of 2024

Decided On: 31.01.2025

ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Arti Devi and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Kshitij Shailendra, J.

Citation: 2025:AHC:14110, MANU/UP/0194/2025.

Print Page

Whether the court can grant the relief to the plaintiff without ascertaining liability of defendant if he fails to reply?

 While arguing the matter much stress was given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner to Section 4 of the 1978 Act which pertains to power of the Labour Commissioner. It was argued that the respondent No. -2 while exercising the powers under 1978 Act had to "ascertain" the wages bill of the establishment in respect of which the alleged default has been committed. By placing reliance on the word "ascertain" Sri P.K. Sinha learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that ascertainment would entail at least a summary investigation so as to ascertain the facts which was a requirement imposed by the 1978 Act upon the Labour Commissioner which he failed to discharge in as much as while passing the order dated 17.8.1998, he has simply rejected the preliminary objections raised by the petitioner and by contending that as the petitioner has not given any information under Form-III as such he has no alternative but to treat the application filed by the workmen i.e. respondent No. -1 as true and proceeded to direct for payment of the amount of approximately Rs. 57 lakhs. Thus, it is contended that once no ascertainment was done by the respondent No. -2 as such the impugned order would be bad in the eyes of law. {Para 6}

12. The word "ascertain" has been defined in the Oxford Advanced learned Dictionary 5th edition as "to investigate so that one knows and is certain; to find out". Thus, a duty was cast upon the Labour Commissioner to have first ascertained as to whether the wages which were being sought for by the respondent No. -1 were actually due or not particularly taking into consideration the fact that upon notice being issued on the application filed by the respondent No. -1 under the provisions of 1978 Act, the petitioner company instead of submitting a parawise reply, submitted its preliminary objection pertaining to the jurisdiction of the Labour Commissioner to entertain the matter. While rejecting the said preliminary objections and simultaneously passing the impugned order dated 17.8.1998 for payment of Rs. 57,59,790.90/- the respondent No. -2 should have been itself satisfied about the actual amount due to the respondent No. -1 after ascertaining the wages bill raised by the respondent No. -1 even if no reply in Form III, as provided in Rule 4 of the 1981 Rules, was forthcoming from the petitioner and it is only after exercising its power given under Section 3 and 4 of the 1978 Act for ascertainment of wages bill that the respondent No. -2 could have proceeded to pass the order for payment of the wages as demanded by the respondent No. -1.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)

Service Single No. 5202 of 1998

Decided On: 15.03.2018

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Aeronautics Karmchari Sabha

Hon'ble Judges/Coram: Abdul Moin, J.

Citation: (2018) 157 FACLR 521: (2018) 4 ADJ 538 (ALL), MANU/UP/1381/2018.

Print Page

Allah HC: Wife Declining To Cohabit With Husband By Forcing Him To Live In Separate Room Amounts To mental Cruelty to husband

 Cohabitation is an essential part of a matrimonial relationship and if the wife declines to cohabit with the husband by forcing him to live in a separate room, she deprives him of his conjugal rights, which will have an adverse impact on his mental and physical well being and which will amount to both physical and mental cruelty. The plaintiff’s allegation of being wrongfully deprived of his conjugal rights has not been controverted by the defendant-respondent and the same has been admitted by implication. {Para 20}

21. In view of the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view that there was sufficient evidence to prove the grounds of cruelty pleaded by the plaintiff-appellant for grant of a decree of divorce the plaintiff has successfully proved by his ex-parte evidence that the defendant was treating him with cruelty.

 ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Case :-FIRST APPEAL No. - 32 of 2023

Jitendra Kumar Srivastava Vs  Smt. Sweta Srivastava

Coram: Hon’ble Rajan Roy J & Hon’ble Subhash Vidyarthi J.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57446-DB.

Date: 22.08.2024.

Print Page

Allahabad HC: Oral gift deed under Muslim Law reduced in to writing which is not registered document can not be subjected to S. 47-A of Stamp Act

It is nobodies case that the hiba/gift deed was presented for registration. Once this fact is admitted by respondents that gift deed/hiba was not presented for registration, then proceedings under Section 47(A) of Indian Stamp Act cannot be pressed to service. Further, Section 47-A of the Act can only be applicable when any instrument/document is presented for registration and not otherwise. If the auhorities were of the view that hiba/git deed was required for payment of stamp duty, then the proceedings u/S 33 of the Stamp Act should have been initiated and not u/s 47-A of the Act. {Para 12}

13. This Court on various occasions has held that the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act cannot be initiated for unregistered documents.

 In the High Court of Allahabad

(Before Piyush Agrawal, J.)

Writ - C No. - 41137 of 2010

Sahas Degree College,Vs State of U.P., 

Decided on August 8, 2024

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine All 4199.

Print Page

Whether Burden of proof for contributory negligence on the part of deceased has to be discharged by the opponents?

 It would be seen that burden of proof for contributory negligence on the part of deceased has to be discharged by the opponents. It is the duty of driver of the offending vehicle to explain the accident.  {Para 17}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

First Appeal From Order No. 1726 of 2001

Decided On: 04.08.2023

U.P.S.R.T.C. Ghaziabad Vs. Neerja Bhatiya and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.

Citation:  MANU/UP/2024/2023,2023:AHC:158461.

Print Page

What courses are available to the Appellate court if accused takes the plea that the trial court has not asked question to him on vital piece of evidence?

Whenever a plea of omission to put a question to the accused on vital piece of evidence is raised in the appellate court, courses available to the appellate court can be briefly summarised as under:-

(i) Whenever a plea of non-compliance of Section 313 Cr.P.C. is raised, it is within the powers of the appellate court to examine and further examine the convict or the counsel appearing for the accused and the said answers shall be taken into consideration for deciding the matter. If the accused is unable to offer the appellate court any reasonable explanation of such circumstance, the court may assume that the accused has no acceptable explanation to offer;

(ii) In the facts and circumstances of the case, if the appellate court comes to the conclusion that no prejudice was caused or no failure of justice was occasioned, the appellate court will hear and decide the matter upon merits.

(iii) If the appellate court is of the opinion that non-compliance with the provisions of Section 313 Cr.P.C. has occasioned or is likely to have occasioned prejudice to the accused, the appellate court may direct retrial from the stage of recording the statements of the accused from the point where the irregularity occurred, that is, from the stage of questioning the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the trial Judge may be directed to examine the accused afresh and defence witness if any and dispose of the matter afresh;

(iv) The appellate court may decline to remit the matter to the trial court for retrial on account of long time already spent in the trial of the case and the period of sentence already undergone by the convict and in the facts and circumstances of the case, may decide the appeal on its own merits, keeping in view the prejudice caused to the accused." {Para 30}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

Criminal Revision No. 2979 of 2011

Decided On: 25.08.2017

Yuvraj Singh and Ors. Vs. State of U.P.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Harsh Kumar, J.

Citation:  MANU/UP/2109/2017.

Print Page