Allahabad high court

Today’s judgment in Sachchidanand Gupta “Sachchey” vs State of UP through Chief Secretary and Others showed that the chief justice of the Allahabad high court had also opposed Justice Sanjay Misra’s name, which was proposed by the chief minister.

The Supreme Court appointed ex-Allahabad high court judge Sanjay Mishra as Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh, reported Mint , after the court had ordered ex-judge Virendra Singh to take up the post in December but admitting that the state government had not shared with the about reservations about the integrity Singh by Allahabad high court chief justice DY Chandrachud.

Also read: The curiouser and curiouser case of the UP Lokayukta appointment.

Court No 7 of Supreme Court was witness to a suspenseful hearing on 20 January as counsel after counsel told the Bench comprising justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant that it had been misled by the Uttar Pradesh Government that Justice Virendra Singh, a former judge of the Allahabad high court, whom it appointed as the Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh under Article 142 of the Constitution, which gives the Court extraordinary powers to do complete justice in a case, was in the list of names being considered by the selection panel. 

In the Additional District and Sessions Judge, ‘X’ v. Supreme Court of India Through Secretary General And Anr., which came up before the bench comprising justices JS Khehar and Rohinton Nariman on 16 December, the petitioner’s counsel, Indira Jaising raised the relevance of the in-house committee report in establishing the misconduct of a judge.

The Allahabad high court asked the state government to notify ‘heritage guidelines’ for the entire state including Varanasi in a Public Interest Litigation alleging illegal construction on heritage structures, reported Times of India.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Dr Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud and Justice Dilip Gupta directed the amicus curiae to inspect the buildings at the ghats of Varanasi to ascertain the representation made by Varanasi Development Authority (VDA) on illegal constructions on ghats to the court.

Though the petitioner said that the illegal constructions around 300 meter perimeter of archeological structures are still rampant despite various orders of courts asking authorities to clear them, VDA contended that it has already issued notices to the buildings and has demolished the buildings found illegal.

The PIL was filed by Kautilya Society and a social activist Vrinda Dar and the court fixed 15 January 2016 as the next date of hearing.

The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) has released its final list of candidates, after the phase of withdrawal of names is over. 

Allahabad high court has in a landmark judgment ruled that a child born out of rape will have inheritance rights over the property of the the biological father reported NDTV.

The court also discussed the need for rehabilitation of victims of rape and their children while adjudicating a matter where a minor child of 13 years was raped and could not abort her child due to medical reasons.

A Division bench of Justices Shabihul Hasnain and DK Upadhayaya appreciated the gesture of the state of UP for not fighting the case adversely and being interested in paying compensation to the victims and their rehabilitation in the judgment. The court noted that the victim was suffering from “Rape Trauma Syndrome” and needs care and attention to lead a healthy and happy life as guaranteed by the constitution as the fundamental right of the citizens. The court also expressed its concern over the well-being of the child born out of the crime whose family was unwilling to accept her.

Noting that the child will be treated as an illegitimate child of the rape accused and will have inheritance rights to his property unless legally adopted by someone, it was reported.

“We may observe here that in the matter relating to inheritance, the manner of birth of a person is irrelevant; the rights of inheritance of a person are governed by the Personal Law to which the person is subject irrespective of the manner of birth of the person. It is irrelevant as to whether the newly-born child of a rape victim is born out of consensual sex or otherwise,”

The court also warned the biological father against claiming rights over the child like visitation or custody. Eventually, the court asked the government to pay the victim 10 lakh apart from the 3 lakhs already paid by them and made several directions to ensure that she is able to absorb herself in the society again.

While parting, the court made an emotional plea with the society to not discriminate with such victims and said,

“All solutions and answers cannot be given by the courts. There are certain social problems and issues which have to be answered by the society itself. It is for the society to decide as to how it wants to treat a rape victim. We should remember that rape is a crime beyond the control of a victim. This tragedy can strike any family. It is not something for which the victim has to be blamed. The whole society should come forward in defence and help of the poor traumatized victim of rape. The society will have to learn to manage their response towards a victim without forgetting that tragedy can befall on one’s own head. When women are respected and promoted by the society as a whole only then a society can be called truly free and liberated. The question of rehabilitation of a rape victim can best be answered by the people and the masses and not by the courts alone. We, therefore, leave this question of rehabilitation of “A” open to the masses whose love and affection can save two normal lives from becoming two negative characters of the society in future. They should be accepted; not haunted by the society. The court has played its role within the parameters of law. Now it is the turn of the seekers of justice from the courts i.e. people of India to see and show their response to the victims of their society. “

GNLU Gandhinagar will reward five of its most recent alumni each year with Rs 7500 each, monthly, as scholarship to practice in courts as a litigation lawyer.

The GNLU Litigation Assistance and Support Scholarship (GLASS), launched by the law school this year, aims to support the litigation career of fresh graduates of the law school. To qualify for GLASS the graduates will have to submit their student academic record, record of litigation internships done during law school, moot court and advocacy skills, publications, extra curricular activities and conferences, and will also be finally interviewed, confirmed GNLU faculty convenor Nidhi Buch.

The personal interview will carry 30 per cent of the evaluation marks and the other things will be worth the remaining 70 per cent. Scholarship holders will also have to submit monthly reports of their litigating career to GNLU to retain the one-year-long scholarship, added Buch.

GNLU’s 2015 batch alumni Garv Malhotra, Saksham Marwa, Sushal Tiwari, Tirth Bhatt and Prince Mishra were awarded the scholarship this year. Mahotra and Marwa are practicing before the Delhi high court, Tiwari is practicing in Bangalore, Bhatt is at the Gujarat high court and Mishra is practicing before the Allahabad high court.

The Allahabad high court has passed an order taking away the freedom of children of public functionaries in Uttar Pradesh to enrol in private schools.

A seven-judge Allahabad high court bench led by chief justice DY Chandrachud served notices on the Bar Council of India (BCI), the Uttar Pradesh bar council and district bar associations about the strike by the local bar against the alleged murder of an advocate by a policeman on district court premises, reported the PTI:

The court said that besides taking stringent action against advocates found guilty of disrupting judicial work, it favored debarring from legal practice all those convicted in criminal cases for which the quantum of sentence was imprisonment for seven years or more.

The BCI had called for a national one-day strike following the killing, with local Allahabad lawyers continuing agitation.

The Allahabad high court quashed the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) age limit and directed CLAT 2015 convenor RMLNLU Lucknow to allow anyone interested in appearing for the test to appear.