Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A two-judge Bench of the Allahabad High Court, invoked the Supreme Court precedent set by Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) , highlighted that individuals belonging to the queer community possess the same constitutional rights as all other citizens, encompassing protected liberties and equal citizenship, devoid of discrimination, and ...
Until 2000, what is now called Uttarakhand was part of Uttar Pradesh, and was therefore subject to the jurisdiction of Allahabad High Court. When the new state was created, Allahabad High Court ceased to have jurisdiction over the districts in it. Building of the circuit bench of Allahabad High Court in Lucknow.
[6] The Supreme Court rejected the plea of the CBI and refused to direct the Governor to prosecute her. On 5 November 2012, Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court upheld trial court's order to close the case for want of sanction to prosecute. It was thought that the case was effectively ended before going to trial.
An appeal was filed in the then Chief Court of Oudh (now Allahabad High Court – Lucknow Bench) on 18 July 1927. The case trials started the next day. The judgement of the trial was pronounced a month later on 22 August. The punishments were given as follows: Death sentence: Ram Prasad Bismil, Roshan Singh, Rajendra Nath Lahiri and Ashfaqullah ...
On July 17, 2003, the CBI court in Lucknow had sentenced gangster Sanjeev Maheshwari and former Samajwadi Party MLA Vijay Singh to life imprisonment in the case. [3] Both convicts had challenged the judgment and filed an appeal in the high court. In 2017, the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court upheld the trial court judgment of life ...
On being acquitted in the predicate offence on 29 September 2021, Mishra challenged the ED case in the Allahabad High Court Lucknow bench. On 18 May 2023 the court stayed the investigation of ED on the ground of its maintainability in light of three-judges bench ruling of the Supreme Court of India in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union Of India ...
In the judgment, the three judges of the Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land be divided into three parts, with 1 ⁄ 3 going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Rama represented by the Hindu Mahasabha, 1 ⁄ 3 going to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board, and the remaining 1 ⁄ 3 going to Nirmohi Akhara.
Jurisprudence from High Courts across the country have said that conversion is not a casual matter. In 2014, the Allahabad High Court stated in a judgement that if conversion "is resorted to merely with the object of creating a ground for some claim of right" it would be "a fraud upon the law". [13]