Created by Fuzzy Cloud

SANDEEP CHAUDHARY JOINT REGISTRAR JUDICIAL

159 judgments · newest first · showing 1–159

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusSURYA LAL AND OTHERS

United India Insurance Company appealed an award made by the Commissioner under the Employees' Compensation Act in favor of Surya Lal, a tanker driver who claimed 60% disability after a road accident. The claimant relied solely on a disability certificate and did not produce evidence of his income …

M/S TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDversusSMT. LOKESH AND 3 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad considered a review application filed by claimants (respondents in the original appeal) seeking relief against the dismissal of their cross‑objection in FAFO No. 2981 of 2005. The claimants were absent at the hearing of the original order and also at the review hearing. …

NARESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The case is Criminal Appeal No. 1102 of 1983 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The appellant, Naresh, appealed against the State of U.P. The judgment delivered by Justice Anil Kumar‑X held that the appeal is partly allowed. The specific orders were directed to be seen in the order of …

SURESHversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants Suresh and Naresh were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad, for a robbery and dacoity (IPC §§395, 397) that occurred on 31 March 1978 when armed miscreants looted passengers from a factory vehicle at a railway crossing. The trial court relied on prompt FIR filing, …

VIJAI PAL AND OTHERSversusSTATE

An FIR was lodged alleging that thirteen accused, armed with lathis and firearms, attacked the complainant's house, injuring three persons with gunshots. The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 324, 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, granting them probation, while acquitting them of …

SMT. JUBAIDA KHATOONversusMOHAMMAD NAQI AND ANOTHER

The plaintiff in an original suit sought a permanent injunction and possession of certain land parcels, while the defendant (revisionist) applied for the appointment of a Survey Commission under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC to ascertain the exact boundaries of the disputed parcels. The trial court dismissed …

HAZI MEHARBAN AND 11 OTHERSversusSATYA NARAYAN AND 15 OTHERS

The revisionists challenged orders of the Executing Court that allowed the decree‑holder to take possession of agricultural land without clear identification of its boundaries. The dispute arose from a specific‑performance suit where the original agreement mentioned 5,050 square yards, but the …

UDAI VEER SINGHversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE OC. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The appellant, a police constable, claimed compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 from an insurance company for injuries sustained in a motorcycle accident on 5 July 1998. He alleged that the accident occurred while he was on patrol duty and that he incurred medical expenses not reimbursed by the police …

SMT. PREM WATI AND OTHERSversusNEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

The appellant, Smt. Prem Wati and others, appealed against the award of compensation for the death of Ram Sevak in a motor vehicle accident, contending that the deceased's income was understated and that the 50% deduction for contributory negligence was unwarranted. The trial Tribunal had assessed …

SMT. SAROJ AND OTHERSversusSMT. NATTHI AND ANOTHER

The appellant appealed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.1,79,500 in a claim for the death of Bhagwat Singh, arguing that the notional income of the deceased was grossly undervalued. The Tribunal had assessed the deceased's income at Rs.15,000 per annum and awarded compensation …

BANSHI RAM AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA THRU G.M. N.E. RAILWAY

The appellant Banshi Ram filed a claim for compensation of Rs.4,00,000 after his son Dinesh Ram died in a railway accident. The Railway Claims Tribunal awarded only Rs.2,00,000, deducting Rs.2,00,000 on the ground that the appellant could not prove he was the legal heir of his deceased wife Jasmati …

SMT. KIRAN SANKHWAR AND OTHERSversusASHOK KUMAR PANDEY AND OTHERS

The appellant sought compensation for the death of Suresh Kumar Shankwar, who was struck by a tanker on 12 September 1999. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal rejected the claim, deeming the sole eyewitness, PW‑3 Raghvendra Singh, unreliable. On appeal, the High Court examined the inconsistencies in …

SMT. PUSHPA DEVI @ PUSHPA SHUKLA AND 2 ORS.versusSHREEKRISHNA

The dispute concerned ownership and possession of a house inherited from the deceased Sri Ram Kishore Tiwari. Two wills were executed by the deceased, the earlier (1984) granting a life interest to his wife and thereafter to his daughter and grandchildren, and a later (2008) revoking the earlier …

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.versusFAIMUDDIN AND OTHERS

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had awarded Rs.1,67,000 with interest to the claimant, holding Oriental Insurance Co. liable for compensation. The insurer appealed, contending that the offending vehicle was not insured on the accident date because the premium cheque issued by the owner was …

SRI RAJU SINGH ALIAS AVNINDRA SINGHversusPRABHAT AND 6 OTHER

The revisionist, Sri Raju Singh (Avnindra Singh), filed a civil revision challenging the Additional District Judge's order rejecting his amendment application in Election Petition No.01 of 2021. The amendment sought to insert additional paragraphs in the written statement alleging criminal …

RAFIQ AND 5 OTHERSversusAAS MOHAMMAD AND 3 OTHERS

The appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction and, during the proceedings, applied for a temporary injunction. The trial court dismissed the temporary injunction application on the ground that the appellants had not produced the latest record of rights (Khatauni) for the disputed agricultural …

PRADEEP KUMARversusSRI SHIV SINGH AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Pradeep Kumar, filed a first appeal against the order dated 2010. The appeal was listed for hearing on a revised list, but the appellant failed to appear before the court. Counsel for the respondents, Sri Shiv Singh and another, were present. The court dismissed the appeal on the …

PAPPU AGRAWAL @ PRABHAKAR AND 2 OTHERSversusAMIT KUMAR MODI AND 8 OTHERS

Two civil suits for partition of land (Arazi Nos. 257, 283, 284) were dismissed by the trial court under Section 116 of the U.P. Revenue Code, holding the property to be agricultural and thus within the jurisdiction of the Revenue Court. The trial court's orders were reversed by a lower appellate …

PAPPU AGRAWAL @ PRABHAKAR AND 2 OTHERSversusPRAVEEN MODI AND 8 OTHERS

The High Court of Allahabad entertained the appeal filed by Pappu Agrawal @ Prabhakar and two others against Praveen Modi and eight others. The court, after considering the matter, allowed the appeal. The order directs that the detailed orders be read in FAFO No.2427 of 2026. No further factual …

KRISHNA KUMAR AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants Krishna Kumar, Lallu and Suresh were convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting the complainant Badri Prasad and his family members, based on the testimony of two injured eyewitnesses. They were released on probation instead of being sentenced to imprisonment. …

SMT. USHA DEVI AND 6 OTHERSversusCHANDRA BHUSHAN UPADHYAY AND 2 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court heard an appeal by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in a 2014 road accident that killed a 37‑year‑old daily labourer. The Tribunal had fixed the deceased's annual income at Rs.36,000, applied a 1/4 deduction for …

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTDversusSMT KUSUM DEVI AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd, filed a first appeal against an order dated 2024. The appellant's counsel, Amit Manohar, sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The court granted the request and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No substantive factual or legal issues were …

SHIV MILAN SINGH (DRIVER)versusRINKI SINGH AND 4 OTHERS

The appellant, Shiv Milan Singh, filed a withdrawal application seeking to withdraw the pending FAFO (First Appeal From Order). The court heard the application and allowed the withdrawal. Consequently, the FAFO was dismissed as withdrawn. No substantive merits of the original dispute were addressed. …

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusARVIND KUMAR AND 5 OTHERS

The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) filed a civil revision seeking to set aside an order of the Additional District Judge that directed the petitioners, Arvind Kumar and others, to deposit an enhanced award arising from a land acquisition proceeding. The award, originally passed under the …

AMAN NAGPALversusNAMAN JAIN AND ANOTHER

The petitioners (revisionists) filed a civil revision (No. 86 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court challenging an earlier order. During the hearing, counsel for the revisionists informed the court that they no longer wished to pursue the revision and sought to withdraw it. The court considered …

PROPRIETOR SHIV KUMAR OFFICE MANDAULI GAGARHversusSMT. MAYA DEVI AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant owned a dumper driven by Gaurav Kumar, who died from electrocution while attempting to free the vehicle. The Employees' Compensation Commissioner awarded Rs.16,89,150 to the deceased's mother, despite the appellant's claim that Rs.3 lakh had already been paid privately to the father. …

SMT. HEM LATA PATHAKversusHARI SHANKAR AND OTHERS

The appellant, Smt. Hem Lata Pathak, filed a first appeal against an order defective dated 2012. No counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant. The respondent's counsel informed the court that the appeal had been pending since 2012 because the appellant failed to furnish the required certificate of …

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. MRIDULA AGARWAL AND OTHERS

The appellant, Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., filed an application supported by an affidavit seeking to withdraw its appeal against the order dated 2011. Counsel for the appellant, Rahul Sahai, argued that the withdrawal should be permitted and the appeal dismissed as withdrawn. The court …

SIDDHARTH TAPADIAversusMH. SHAHID AND OTHERS

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

The appellant, Siddharth Tapadia, filed a first appeal against Order No. 1190 of 2010 before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant, and it was evident that the appellant was not interested in pursuing the appeal. The court noted the absence of prosecution and, …

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. USHA DEVI AND OTHERS

The Oriental Insurance Co. appealed a compensation award of Rs.3,49,923 granted by the Employees' Compensation Commissioner to the widow of a deceased bus driver, alleging misappreciation of evidence and procedural errors. The appellant raised seven substantive questions, including the existence of …

SMT. RAJKUMARI AND 4 OTHERSversusCHIEF MANAGER, U.P.S.R.T.C. AND ANOTHER

The appellants, Smt. Rajkumari and four others, filed a first appeal against the Chief Manager of U.P.S.R.T.C. and another respondent. The appeal was listed under Chapter XII Rule 4 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, which mandates the appellant to supply requisites for service on the respondent. …

BICHIN SHARMAversusDEVENDRA KUMAR AND ANR.

The appellant, Bichin Sharma, claimed compensation after his motorcycle was hit by a Tata 407 driven on the wrong side of the road, resulting in serious injuries to him and his passenger. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.15,19,140 after reducing the total compensation of Rs.20,25,520 by …

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. SUNITA AND 5 ORS.

The appeal filed by United India Insurance Co. Ltd. challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs. 9,31,000 in favor of the deceased's family, alleging that the eyewitnesses' contradictory statements and their illiteracy rendered the evidence unreliable. The Tribunal had found the …

MANISH DIXITversusMAHANT PANCHAM DASS AND OTHERS

Manish Dixit filed a civil revision challenging an order that allowed the plaintiff's substitution application in an original suit. Dixit was not a party to the suit when the substitution was permitted and his earlier attempt to be impleaded had been rejected. He argued that a prior judgment in …

SMT. NISHA DEVI AND 3 OTHERSversusRAMANAND DIXIT AND 3 ORS.

The case concerns two first appeals against Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awards for the deaths of Lalit Kumar and Rakesh in a 2013 truck accident. The appellants argued that the deceased earned substantially higher agricultural incomes and sought enhanced compensation, invoking the Supreme Court's …

SMT. SUNITA DEVI AND 4 ORS.versusRAMANAND DIXIT AND 3 ORS.

This is a first appeal filed by Smt. Sunita Devi and four others against the order No. 1864 of 2016 passed by a lower court. The appellants were represented by counsel Pramod Kumar Sinha and the respondents by G.K. Srivastava and Komal Mehrotra. The matter was heard by Hon’ble Justice Anil Kumar‑X …

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusSMT. NEERAJ DEVI AND 8 ORS.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had awarded Rs.24,62,102 as compensation to the widows of a deceased motorcyclist, finding that his death resulted from injuries sustained in a road accident involving a tractor. Reliance General Insurance appealed, contending that the causal link between the …

IQBALversusHUKAM SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, Iqbal, filed a civil revision challenging the dismissal of their suit and a subsequent dismissal of their appeal with a Section 5 limitation condonation application. No counsel appeared for the petitioners at the hearing. The respondents argued that the revision was not maintainable …

MURALI DHAR TIWARIversusKAILASH NATH TIWARI AND 25 OTHERS

The petitioners, Murali Dhar Tiwari and others, filed a civil revision before the Allahabad High Court challenging a lower court order. The revision was presented by counsel Dheeraj Kumar Pandey and Lakshmi Kant Pandey, while the respondents were represented by Ashutosh Mani Tripathi. The court …

MUKESH KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusJAI SINGH JATAV AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, Mukesh Kumar and another, filed a civil revision in the Allahabad High Court challenging a lower court order. The revision was valued at less than Rs.25 lakhs, which under the applicable procedural rules makes it non‑maintainable before the High Court. The court, relying on the …

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD.versusSMT JAYA ADITYA AND OTHERS

The appeal filed by New India Assurance Co. challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of Rs.15,33,656 to the dependents of Sharda Prasad, who died in a bus accident. The insurer argued that the Tribunal had improperly accepted a salary certificate without proper proof and had misrecorded …

JAGPALversusUTTAR PRADESH SARKAR AND 2 OTHERS

The decree‑holder Jagpal filed a civil revision challenging the Additional District Judge’s order dismissing his 2009 execution petition for unpaid 12% interest on compensation awarded in a land‑acquisition case. The earlier execution petition filed in 1998 had been concluded in 2003 after the …

DINESH KUMAR GUPTA AND ANOTHERversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The appellants claimed compensation for the death of a two‑year‑old child knocked down by a jeep on a national highway. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 2,25,000 based on a notional annual income of Rs 15,000 for the child. The appellants sought a higher award, citing Supreme Court …

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusMRS. BABLI AND OTHERS

National Insurance Company Limited appealed a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award of Rs. 2,16,000 granted to Mrs. Babli and others for a 12 October 2002 accident in which the deceased was struck by a tanker. The appellant argued that the driver’s licence was found to be fake, a fact verified by the …

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTDversusSMT. SUNEETA AND OTHERS

The appellant Oriental Insurance Co. challenged the compensation award granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in favor of the respondents, Suneeta and others, alleging that the tribunal ignored contributory negligence and failed to deduct the family pension and Dying in Harness benefits …

ASHOK KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSMT. SANTOSH

The revision petition filed by Ashok Kumar and another was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court as a defective revision for non prosecution. No counsel appeared for either party. The court noted the lack of prosecution and ordered dismissal. The judgment was delivered on September 9, 2026 by …

MAHESH KUMARversusVIMLA DEVI AND OTHERS

The appellant Mahesh Kumar filed an appeal, but he died before the hearing. No party appeared to seek substitution of his legal heirs. The appellant's counsel argued that the appeal should be abated due to the lack of a representative. The court examined whether the appeal could continue in the …

MAHARAJ KUMARI VISHNUPRIYAversusMAHARAJ KUMARI HARPRIYA AND 2 OTHERS

Maharaj Kumari Vishnupriya filed a suit for injunction, partition and declaration concerning five properties and sought a temporary injunction, which the trial court dismissed. She appealed that dismissal, and the High Court, on 14 July 2026, observed that the plaintiff's injunction application was …

ANITA RATHORE AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction to restrain the State of U.P. and the police from interfering with their possession of 950 sq m of land that they claim has been under a lease since 1942. The trial court dismissed their interim injunction application, holding that the revenue …

SMT. POONAM AND 5 ORS.versusNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND 2 ORS.

The appellants challenged the dismissal of their motor accident claim by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which had rejected their petition on the basis of a delayed FIR and the unreliability of an alleged eyewitness, PW‑2 Ram Kumar. The deceased, Devendra Kumar, was killed in a road accident on …

RIZWAN MIYANversusSTATE OF UP AND 19 OTHERS

The appellant, a 1/36th co‑sharer of Gata Nos. 363 and 366 in Bareilly, appealed the trial court's dismissal of his application for a temporary injunction to restrain co‑sharers from interfering with his alleged possession of a shop and flat. He produced the record of rights (Khatauni) showing his …

AKHATAR ALI @ AKHTAR HASAN @ ZIYAversusRAM BHAJAN GUPTA AND OTHERS

The appellant‑claimant sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for injuries sustained by her husband, Akhtar Ali, in a motorcycle collision on 28‑Oct‑2002. The tribunal had granted Rs 1,12,901.81 with interest, including medical expenses and attendant …

SUNITA DAS AND OTHERSversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The appellants challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s award of Rs.1,27,000 as inadequate compensation for the death of Umapad Das, a retired railway employee who earned a pension of Rs.3,000 per month and a private‑job income of Rs.3,000 per month. The High Court examined whether the …

SMT. ARPI GUPTA AND OTHERSversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The claimants sought compensation for the death of Anil Kumar, who was crushed by a jeep while waiting on the roadside. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.1,77,000 based on a notional annual income of Rs.15,000 and a multiplier of 17, rejecting the claimants' evidence of a higher income. …

M/S KANCHAN AUTOMOBILESversusSMT. RITA KUSHWAHA AND OTHERS

The appellant Kanchan Automobiles appealed against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award that held it liable to pay Rs.2,71,150 as compensation for injuries sustained by the claimant Rita Kushwaha in a tractor accident on 23.08.2006. The appellant argued that the tractor had already been sold to …

DILEEP KUMAR OJHA AND 2 OTHERSversusSMT RAMA YADAV AND 4 OTHERS

The appellants appealed against a temporary injunction order dated 17‑03‑2026 granted by the Additional CJ/M Civil Judge in a suit concerning possession of land. The trial court later set aside that injunction order on 14‑08‑2026 after hearing a revision application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC, …

MUNINDRA ALIAS GUDDU AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of the informant, were charged under Section 14‑A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged caste‑based harassment, dowry demands and assault. The FIR placed the alleged offences in a village in …

SMT SONIKA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Smt Sonika Singh filed a petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court against the State of Uttar Pradesh and another respondent. The petitioner, through counsel Ajay Kumar Chaurasia, sought to have the petition dismissed as withdrawn, requesting liberty to file a fresh …

PRASHANT YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Prashant Yadav filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court challenging an order of the State of U.P. and another respondent. The matter was listed before Justice Anil Kumar‑X and was heard by counsel for both parties. The petitioner, through his …

JITENDRA KUMAR RAIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, a constable, challenged two lower court orders that dismissed his application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, alleging that the investigating officer had falsely recorded his statement as being taken in Ghazipur while he was posted in Bhadohi. He contended that …

OM PRAKASH CHAUHANversusASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA

The petitioner, Om Prakash Chauhan, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Special Judicial Magistrate-II, Kanpur Nagar, to decide a complaint (Case No. 81171 of 2021) filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petition argued for an expeditious disposal of …

BASHINULLAH ALIAS MATRAversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Bashiullah @ Matru was convicted by the Sessions Court for robbery (Section 393 read with Section 398 IPC) and attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC) and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment for the robbery and five years for the attempt, to run concurrently. The appellant …

RAJEEV AGRAWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Rajeev Agrawal, sought to quash a summoning order dated 17‑11‑2022 and a revisional order dated 07‑07‑2023 in a criminal complaint alleging assault, criminal intimidation and robbery, arguing that the allegations were false, the investigation report cleared him, and the case stemmed …

RADHA GOVINDversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petition filed by Radha Govind sought to set aside the Allahabad High Court’s order dated 11‑12‑2023 which had restored a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that had been dismissed for non‑prosecution under Section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The complainant …

KASHISH MITTALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Kashish Mittal, filed a miscellaneous petition under Article 227 challenging a revisional order dated 21 September 2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad, which had set aside a trial court order of 24 November 2023 that summoned the respondent to face prosecution …

SAVITRI DEVI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Savitri Devi and her husband, challenged orders of the Sessions Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate that summoned them under Section 420 IPC for allegedly cheating a respondent of Rs.70,000 meant for a housing scheme. They contended that the amount was mistakenly credited to the …

KULDEEP KUMAR ARUN AND 6 OTHERSversusState of UP AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners expressed that they no longer wished to pursue the relief sought and requested that the petition be withdrawn. The court considered the petitioner's …

SMT. ANITA DEVIversusState of U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Smt. Anita Devi, challenged two orders: the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s dismissal of her protest petition on 06.06.2023 and the Sessions Judge’s affirmation of that dismissal in a criminal revision on 01.03.2024. The protest petition arose from an FIR filed under Sections 147, 323, …

RAJ BAHADUR YADAVversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Raj Bahadur Yadav filed a criminal complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code alleging that the respondent, an army personnel, had forged his age by obtaining two matriculation certificates ten years apart to secure army employment. The trial court and a revisional …

HAR SWAROOPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 12 OTHERS

The petitioner, Har Swaroop, claimed that his uncle fraudulently transferred property that was bequeathed to him under a will, and he sought criminal action under Section 156(3) of the CrPC to register an FIR. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint after treating it as a …

NAWAB HASANversusSTAE ASHOK KUMAR AGARWAL AND OTHERS

The appellant Nawab Hasan filed a criminal appeal (No. 509 of 1986) before the Allahabad High Court challenging an acquittal order passed by the Additional Magistrate, Pilibhit in 1981. The appeal was against the State represented by A.G.A. No counsel appeared for the respondents in the revised …

SURJEETversusSTATE

Surjeet filed a criminal appeal before the Allahabad High Court, but failed to appear at the hearing despite a revised call. The State's learned Advocate General was present. The court learned from the office report that the appellant, Surjeet, had died. Since the appellant was deceased, the court …

BRAHAM PRAKASH AND OTHERSversusSTATE

The appeal challenges the conviction of Brahma Prakash and Ganga Saran for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC (with common intention under Section 34 for Ganga Saran) and illegal possession of a firearm under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The incident involved the accused firing a country‑made …

CHANDRAWATI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Chandrawati Devi, owned a vehicle that was seized by police under Section 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1955, on suspicion of being used for illegal liquor transport. The District Magistrate ordered the vehicle's confiscation without offering the owner an opportunity to redeem it by …

BHOLA NATH YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, Bhola Nath Yadav and another, filed a writ petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside an order dated 11 August 2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad, which rejected their application for a stay in Criminal Revision No. 364 of 2023. The petition alleged that …

MINAKSHI SAXENA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

The petitioners challenged two orders: one by the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing a criminal revision, and another by the Civil Judge allowing the sister of a deceased complainant to continue proceedings under Section 506 IPC. The petitioner argued that the sister, being only a sibling and not …

VIRENDRA KUMAR YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Virendra Kumar Yadav filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside a magistrate's order rejecting his application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and a subsequent revision order, both of which dismissed his claim that the respondent habitually issued dishonoured …

RAJVEER AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners Rajveer and four others filed an appeal under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court. No private respondent appeared, and only counsel for the petitioners and the State respondent were present. The petitioner’s counsel requested that the appeal be dismissed as withdrawn. The …

SATYENDRA KUMARversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner Satyendra Kumar filed an Article 227 petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking to set aside an order dated 21 March 2025 of the Additional Sessions Judge and a subsequent order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 20 November 2023, which had dismissed his protest petition in a …

SMT. REKHA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Rekha Devi, filed a criminal complaint alleging dowry demand and harassment by her husband’s relatives and later moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon additional accused, which the trial court dismissed without reasons. The petitioner appealed the dismissal through …

SOORAJversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Sooraj Singh, executed a lease deed with the respondent on 24-10-2017, stipulating a rent of Rs.5,000 per month, which the respondent allegedly withheld and failed to vacate the premises. The petitioner filed a criminal complaint (No.1271/2024) alleging fraud and non‑payment of rent, …

RADHEYSHYAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Radheyshyam, was charged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a bounced cheque. He applied to the trial court for the production of a loan agreement, claiming the cheque was given as security and not to discharge a debt. Both the trial court and the revisional …

SHRI RAM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners challenged the attachment of their land ordered by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (SDM) under Section 146(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the subsequent dismissal of their criminal revision by the Additional District and Session Judge. They filed a petition under Article 227 of …

RITA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner Rita Devi filed a petition under Article 227 challenging two orders: the trial court’s dismissal of her complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and the revisional court’s upholding of that dismissal. The dispute arose from a land conflict settled by a …

SHALIN MUDGALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Shalin Mudgal, filed a petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition while seeking liberty to file a fresh petition before the appropriate court. The respondent, the State of U.P., raised no objection to the withdrawal. The …

MRS. MUSTAKEEM BEGUMversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Mrs. Mustakeem Begum, challenged the confiscation and auction of her vehicle ordered by the District Magistrate under the U.P. Cow Slaughter Prevention Act and related IPC provisions, alleging that the vehicle was falsely implicated in a criminal case. The High Court noted that the …

MUNIRAJ SINGHversusVIJAY KUMAR SINGH AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner filed a writ under Article 227 seeking to set aside the order dated 13‑12‑2024 of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, which had overturned an earlier order dated 03‑02‑2023 passed by the Sub‑Divisional Officer under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The 2023 order …

OM PRAKASH RAI AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to set aside an order dated 21 March 2023 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-01), Azamgarh, which had remanded a criminal case back to the trial court for fresh consideration. The original FIR …

RAJEEV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners challenged orders dated 20‑01‑2024 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat, and 27‑01‑2025 by the Additional Session Judge, on the ground that the lower courts relied solely on the victim's and informant's statements while ignoring material evidence, notably mobile‑phone location …

RAJEEV KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

Petitioner Rajeev Kumar alleged that his father's adoption and inheritance rights were being usurped by respondents who forged a death certificate of Sardar Singh to claim the ancestral house. A police report corroborated the forgery, but the complaint filed under Section 156(3) of the Criminal …

VENKATESHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Venkatesh, a member of Ajnara Integrity Society, was summoned by a magistrate under Section 500 IPC based on a complaint alleging he circulated false messages about a fellow society member. The petitioner challenged the summoning order and a subsequent revision order, arguing that …

SANJAY SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Sanjay Singh, filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner subsequently moved the Court seeking to withdraw the petition and requested liberty to file a fresh petition before the appropriate forum. The learned Additional …

RAKESH KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Rakesh Kumar and another, challenged orders dated 6 July 2023 (by a Judicial Magistrate) and 7 December 2024 (by a revisional court) that summoned them under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case involving offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections …

RAGHUVIR SINGH AND 6 OTHERSversusState of UP AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Raghuvir Singh and six others, filed a writ petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court. Counsel for the petitioners was Mr. Rakesh Dubey, while the State of U.P. was represented by G.A. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petition be …

RAHUL GARG AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Rahul Garg and others, filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a summoning order dated 18‑06‑2025 and the criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. 1026 of 2023 (Venkatesh v. Rahul Garg & Ors.) filed under IPC sections 406, 468 and 471. Both parties, …

BITTAN DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

The petitioner Bittan Devi filed a petition under Article 227 challenging two orders: one of the Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) dismissing a criminal revision, and another of the ACJM converting her application under Section 175(3) of the BNSS into a complaint case. She alleged …

ASHOK KUMAR AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners challenged a revisional order dated 22 September 2025 that had set aside a trial court’s dismissal of a Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The trial court had held the allegations to be civil in nature and directed the complainant to …

JAVAHARLAL GAUDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, Javaharlal Gaud, filed a criminal complaint alleging assault by the respondents, but the trial court dismissed the complaint on the basis that the allegations were exaggerated and no medical injury report was produced. Gaud contended that the police refused to facilitate a medical …

DHARMVEER SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Dharmveer Singh, filed a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the dismissal of his criminal complaint by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, which held that the dispute was essentially a property matter and the allegations against the respondent were false. The complaint …

DHARAMENDRA KUMAR GUPTAversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, owner of a scrap vehicle business, challenged the seizure of eight engines by police under Sections 317(2), 317(4) and 317(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, claiming the allegations were false and that he had produced ownership documents. The release application filed before the …

ABDUL SALMAN KHAN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners were summoned under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 474 IPC on the allegation that a sale deed dated 23 March 1957, executed in favour of the petitioner's father, was forged. The State alleged that the petitioners were merely tenants who fabricated the deed to claim ownership, and …

SMT. GUDDI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Guddi Devi alleged that a toilet constructed by respondents encroached upon a five‑foot public passage in front of her house, reducing the width to two feet. The Sub‑Divisional Magistrate (SDM) initially held that no encroachment existed, but the Additional Sessions Judge, in Criminal …

ROBINA KHATOONversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Robina Khatoon filed a petition under Article 227 seeking supervisory intervention over a pending trial court case (Complaint Case No.984 of 2021). The petitioner later requested that the petition be treated as withdrawn, but asked the High Court to direct the trial court to decide the …

SMT. DEEPALI @ DEEPALI BHARGAV AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Smt. Deepali @ Deepali Bhargav and two others, filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court. Their counsel, Jitendra Pratap Singh and Sunil Vashisth, later moved that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn. The court considered the request …

SUNEELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

Petitioner Suneel filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside an order dated 23‑02‑2024 of the Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act) that allowed Criminal Revision No. 252/2022 (Shaukeen v. Suneel & others), and also to set aside an order dated 21‑10‑2022 of the Sub‑Divisional …

AJAY SINGH VERMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Ajay Singh Verma sought to set aside orders dismissing his discharge application in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act case, arguing the lower courts acted illegally. The discharge application had been rejected by a Judicial Magistrate and the subsequent criminal revision was also …

SHRI NATH GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioner Shri Nath Gupta sought a direction under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to register an FIR alleging that the respondents had forged signatures on a compromise deed filed in a civil suit. The Special Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application, holding that the …

MANISHA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

Manisha Devi filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside the Allahabad High Court's order dated 21 September 2024, which had annulled a trial court's summons in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act case. The petitioner argued that the respondent had been properly served with …

FARUKH ALIAS NARGIS KINNARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioner, a transgender individual, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside orders of the Sessions Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate that dismissed his application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, alleging extortion over a demanded 'badhai' …

SMT. ANURADHA AND ANOTHERversusAJAY KUMAR

The petitioners filed a writ under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Family Court, Meerut, to decide an execution case within a stipulated period. The petition argued that the Family Court had not acted timely. The Court noted that orders of the Family Court are appealable under Section 19 of …

SARITA DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Sarita Devi, the registered owner of a vehicle seized in a cow‑slaughter case, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside the District Magistrate’s order confiscating the vehicle and the subsequent criminal revision order. The petitioner claimed the vehicle was falsely implicated and …

HARISH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A petition under Article 227 (No. 8835 of 2025) was filed by Harish Kumar against the State of U.P. and another respondent. The petitioner was represented by counsel Prakash Veer Tripathi. During the hearing, the petitioner expressed that he no longer wished to pursue the petition. The counsel …

NEERAJ DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner, Neeraj Devi, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking to set aside the dismissal of her complaint alleging dowry harassment, domestic violence, and related offences by the Judicial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge. She claimed that her husband and in‑laws had demanded …

SMT. SHUBHAVATI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Shubhavati Devi filed a petition under Article 227 challenging an attachment order passed by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate under Section 146(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The order was based on an application under Section 145 CrPC alleging illegal possession of agricultural land, but the …

SHYAM KUMAR JAISWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioner claimed that an oral agreement to sell a house, for which he paid Rs. 6 lakh, was breached by the respondents who neither executed the sale deed nor returned the money. He filed a complaint under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, which the magistrate dismissed as a civil matter, and …

LAXMAN SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner alleged that his brother fabricated a forged mortgage deed on a ten‑rupee stamp paper after their father's death, purportedly to obtain illegal possession of agricultural land. He filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking a police FIR, which the …

NASEEM BUX AND 2 OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

The petitioners, Naseem Bux and two others, were accused in Criminal Case No. 252 of 2000 and were transferred to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) at Lalitpur by a High Court order dated 13‑08‑2004, which directed that the case be treated as an inquiry proceeding. The CJM later dismissed …

SUDHIR KUMAR CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner alleged that he transferred Rs. 61,75,000 to the respondent's rice mill based on false representations and sought criminal investigation under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Civil Judge dismissed the application, deeming the dispute civil, and the Sessions Judge …

ARSHAD AHMEDversusState of UP AND ANOTHER

The petitioner Arshad Ahmed challenged orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in Bijnor that took cognizance of offences under various IPC sections and the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the magistrate failed to consider the primary police report together with the supplementary report …

MOHAMMAD SALMAN SIDDIQUI AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Mohammad Salman Siddiqui and four others, filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the Allahabad High Court. The petition sought relief against the State of Uttar Pradesh and another respondent. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners informed the court …

CHARU SHARMAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Charu Sharma, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash an order dated 30 September 2024 passed by the Additional Principal Judge of Family Court No.1, Meerut in a family law case. The petition alleged that the family court order should be set …

VIKAS SHARMA @ GUGGOOversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioner, Vikas Sharma, alleged that he was illegally detained by police from 15‑03‑2023 to 30‑03‑2023 and that a false report claiming non‑functional CCTV cameras was filed to conceal the misconduct. He sought relief under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after an RTI response indicated the cameras …

NAZIM AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The petitioners, Nazim and three others, challenged orders summoning them under Section 190(1)(b) of the CrPC after multiple police closure reports concluded the allegations were false. They argued that the informant’s statements were unreliable, the medical evidence cast doubt on a firearm injury, …

YUVARAJ AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND 8 OTHERS

The Allahabad High Court restored a habeas corpus petition filed by the mother, Smt. Swati Bhartiya, seeking custody of her minor children Yuvaraj and Ayushman after a special appeal overturned an earlier order that had justified the father's transfer of custody to his sister and her husband. The …

MOHD. TAHIRversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Mohd. Tahir alleged that his cheques were stolen and misused, leading to a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He sought to set aside the order of the Additional District and Session Judge dated 14‑10‑2025 and the Special Court order dated 30‑11‑2022, claiming …

MOHD. TAHIRversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Petitioner Mohd. Tahir sought a direction under Article 227 to set aside an order dated 14‑10‑2025 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur, in a criminal revision concerning a cheque‑bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He alleged that his cheques …

SMT. NEERAJ @ NAINA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UTTER PRADESH AND ANOTHER

The petitioners sought relief under Article 227 of the Constitution to set aside two lower‑court orders dated 11 June 2025 and 28 January 2025 involving IPC offences. They claimed that the disputes underlying those orders had been amicably resolved through the Allahabad High Court Mediation and …

UPENDRA NATH PANDEYversusState of UP

The petitioner, Upendra Nath Pandey, applied to have his bank account defrozen after it was sealed by police following an FIR under several IPC offences. The trial court dismissed the application, holding that the investigation was still pending, and the revisional court affirmed that order. The …

MANISH SHARMA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The victim, a Scheduled Caste woman, alleged that she had a consensual relationship of over two years with the appellant, a Brahmin, and that he later refused to marry her while hurling caste‑based insults. The FIR was registered under Sections 69 and 352 of the IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) …

REGIONAL PROVEDENT FUND COMMISSIONERversusRAJA RAM JAIPURIYA AND OTHERS

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner appealed against the trial court's acquittal of the Managing Director and Manager of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Ltd., who had been tried alongside the company and its occupier for an alleged violation of Section 14(1A) of the Employees Provident Fund and …

SHYAM NARAINversusSTATE

The appellant, Shyam Narain, filed a criminal appeal (No. 3002 of 1985) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared for the appellant at the revised call, and the State was represented by A.G.A. The court's office report indicated that the appellant had died. Consequently, the court held …

K.P. SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE

The appellants, Krishna Pal and Ram Pal, appealed against an order under Section 446 of the Criminal Procedure Code that forfeited their surety bonds and imposed a penalty of Rs.4,000 each. During the pendency of the appeal, a report indicated that Ram Pal had died, leading to the abatement of the …

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE

The appellant, Santosh Kumar Singh, was fined Rs.100 under Section 350 of the Criminal Procedure Code for failing to appear in court and subsequently escaping custody. He appealed, arguing that his non‑appearance was due to departmental duties and not deliberate. The respondent contended that the …

SANTOSH KUMAR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

Santosh Kumar Singh, a police investigating officer, was taken into custody by a Special Judge but escaped and later returned, after which the court, invoking Section 345 CrPC, fined him Rs.200 for his misconduct under Section 228 IPC. The appellant challenged the fine, arguing his absence was due …

SMT SUMITRA DEVIversusSTATE OF UP AND 6 OTHERS

The appellant, Smt. Sumitra Devi, filed an application under Section 173(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (BNSS) invoking Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act, alleging simple assault. The Special Judge rejected the application on the ground that no written complaint was filed with the SHO and no …

BHANU MAURYA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants Bhanu Maurya and another were charged under sections 323, 504, 506, 452 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 based on an FIR filed by an informant who claimed to belong to a Scheduled Caste. They filed a …

ANAND KUMAR AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants challenged a cognizance and summoning order dated 10‑12‑2025 issued by a Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in a criminal complaint alleging assault, property damage and other offences. The appellants argued that the complaint …

MOHIT YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants Mohit Yadav and another appealed under Section 14‑A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against a cognizance and summoning order dated 21‑April‑2022 that had been issued in a case involving alleged molestation of the complainant's …

ANIL KUMAR DUBEYversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Anil Kumar Dubey, was charged under Section 14‑A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly threatening a woman who claimed to be his brother's first wife and for using casteist slurs. The FIR alleged that the appellant, together …

VEERPAL CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The appellants Veerpal Chaudhary and Lokesh Chaudhary appealed against a charge-sheet and order of a Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The victim’s FIR alleged that Veerpal assaulted and molested her in a forest, while later statements under …

PARAS NATH PATEL @ PARAS NATHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Paras Nath Patel appealed to the Allahabad High Court under Section 14‑A(1) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act seeking to quash the trial court’s cognizance order, non‑bailable warrant and charge sheet in a case that alleged offences under IPC Sections 419, 420, 406, 504 and SC/ST Act …

SMT. SEEMA CHAUDHARY AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants, Smt. Seema Chaudhary and another, appealed against a summoning order and criminal proceedings under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several IPC sections. The respondents, who were tenants in the appellants' shop, defaulted on rent, prompting the appellants to file a …

BALAK CHAND BIND AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants, Balak Chand Bind and two others, appealed a trial court order that summoned them under Section 319 CrPC based on an application under Section 44(Kha). The trial court had relied on the statement of PW‑1, Pappu, who admitted he was not present at the incident, to justify the summons. …

SANJAY AWASTHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant Sanjay Awasthi appealed against a cognizance and summoning order issued by a Special Judge under Section 14‑A(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The FIR alleged that the appellant and three others, armed with clubs, sticks and an axe, …

GOBIND SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellant Govinda and Suraj were convicted by the Sessions Court under Section 364 IPC for kidnapping with the intention to murder Sita Ram, whose decapitated body was later found. The trial court acquitted them of murder and related charges, finding no evidence of who killed the victim. On …

HEERA LAL AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P.

The appellants, Heera Lal and Moti Lal, appealed against an order dated 13‑January‑1987 of the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Banda, which forfeited their surety bonds and imposed a penalty of Rs.5,000 each under Section 446 of the Criminal Procedure Code. During the pendency of the appeal, the …

RAJESH KUMAR SHUKLAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellant Rajesh Kumar Shukla challenged a non‑bailable warrant (NBW) dated 06‑06‑2022 issued by the Additional Sessions Judge in a case under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(10) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appeal was filed under Section 14‑A(1) of the SC/ST Act …

DR SHAILENDRA SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The appellants appealed against a summoning order and the entire criminal proceedings initiated under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, alleging that the case stemmed from a civil land‑demarcation dispute. The informant claimed the appellants were …