Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975 AIR 865, 1975 SCR (3) 333) was a 1975 case heard by the Allahabad High Court that found the Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi guilty of electoral malpractices.
Poonam Rani & Anr. v. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2021) a decision of the Allahabad High Court, reaffirmed that the Constitutional Court bears the responsibility of overseeing and upholding both constitutional morality and the rights of citizens, particularly when these rights are endangered solely due to their sexual orientation. [1] [2] [3]
State of Uttar Pradesh explicitly highlight the entitlement of queer individuals in relationships to equal citizenship and protection under the law and reinforced the principle of non-discrimination. [3] [5] [6] A two-judge Bench of the Allahabad High Court, invoked the Supreme Court precedent set by Navtej Singh Johar v.
On 25 February 1948, the Chief Court of Oudh was amalgamated with the High Court of Allahabad. 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.
The high courts of India are the highest courts of appellate jurisdiction in each state and union territory of India.However, a high court exercises its original civil and criminal jurisdiction only if the subordinate courts are not authorized by law to try such matters for lack of peculiar or territorial jurisdiction.
On 2 July 2015, the Court sought the response of the Uttar Pradesh government on a plea seeking replacement of the state's current lokayukta N.K. Mehrotra, [32] The Allahabad High Court also sought response for the same from the government on 23 July 2015. [27]
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]
The Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha and Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board moved to the Supreme Court of India, challenging part of the Allahabad High Court's verdict. [123] [124] 2011: 9 May: Supreme Court of India stayed the High Court order splitting the disputed site in three parts and said that status quo will remain. 2019 6 August