LawLoveLegal

The Allahabad High Court has strongly criticised the functioning of Uttar Pradesh’s birth certificate issuance system, describing it as a “mess” and reflective of dishonesty operating at multiple administrative levels. The court’s observations came during the hearing of a writ petition that exposed the ease with which multiple birth certificates with conflicting details can be obtained in the state. Case Background: Two Birth Certificates, Two Different Dates of Birth Facts of the Petition The issue surfaced during the hearing of a writ petition filed by an individual named Shivanki . The Deputy Director of UIDAI, Regional Office, Lucknow, submitted documents that revealed the petitioner possessed two separate birth certificates , both issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, but: from two different authorities, and with two different dates of birth. Details of the Conflicting Certificates Certificate 1: Issued by: Primary Health Centre, Manauta Date of bir...

Background of the Case The Allahabad High Court, in a recent ruling dated 7 November , declined to grant police protection to a couple claiming to be in a live-in relationship. The petition was filed by Sonam and her alleged partner (referred to as petitioner no. 2), who sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the woman’s husband and the police from interfering in their lives. The Court emphasized that the woman was still legally married under the Hindu Marriage Act , and therefore, the claimed “live-in relationship” could not be accorded legal protection. Court’s Key Observation: Freedom Cannot Override Legal Rights Freedom vs. Statutory Rights Justice Vivek Kumar Singh held that although an adult has autonomy over personal choices, including relationships, such autonomy is not absolute . The Court clarified that the right to personal liberty under the Constitution cannot be exercised to violate the statutory rights of another person . Quote from the judgment: “A spouse has sta...

Encroachment of public land has become one of the gravest challenges in India’s urban and rural governance. From roads and footpaths to village ponds and forest areas, illegal occupation of land not only undermines the rule of law but also threatens environmental sustainability, public resources, and the right to equitable access. The recent directive from the Allahabad High Court , ordering the removal of encroachments from public land within 90 days across Uttar Pradesh , marks a crucial step toward restoring accountability and protecting common property. Allahabad High Court’s Landmark Order In a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Manoj Kumar Singh , it was alleged that a village pond in Chauka village of Mirzapur district was encroached upon by locals and that the administration failed to take action. The bench led by Justice P.K. Giri , in an order dated October 6, 2025 , directed the Uttar Pradesh government to remove all encroachments from public or utility lands wi...

The Allahabad High Court has issued a directive for status quo to be maintained on a fresh dispute over alleged illegal constructions on the Yamuna floodplain in Noida. The court’s decision, issued on August 26 and uploaded on August 31, 2025 , consolidates ongoing legal scrutiny of environmental violations in the ecologically sensitive region. Background: Petition by 30 Farmhouse Owners The court order came in response to a petition filed by 30 farmhouse owners challenging demolition notices issued by the Noida Authority . The petitioners alleged selective targeting of certain properties, claiming that their farmhouses: Are five kilometres away from the riverbank Lie outside the High Flood Level (HFL) zone Are temporary in nature Do not obstruct the natural flow of the Yamuna River The petitioners also challenged the Noida Authority’s demarcation of the floodplain, carried out under the River Ganga (Rejuvenation, Protection and Management) Authorities Order, 201...

The Uttar Pradesh government has informed the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court that unsafe and dilapidated portions of 7,630 schools across the state have been demolished between April 1, 2024, and July 31, 2025 . This action, aimed at improving student safety, follows strict adherence to the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Avinash Mehrotra vs. Union of India and Others , which emphasized school safety infrastructure. Compliance with Supreme Court Guidelines The demolition drive targeted government primary, junior high, and composite schools identified as structurally unsafe. According to the state government’s affidavit, a statewide safety inspection is ongoing to ensure compliance with Supreme Court mandates. Additional Advocate General ( AAG ) K.P. Tripathi , appearing before the division bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Brij Raj Singh , informed the court that the tender process for further safety inspections is already underway and is expected to con...

Apex Court Cautions Against Insensitive Judicial Language In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has strongly criticised the Allahabad High Court for making inappropriate remarks in a rape case, particularly the observation that the complainant "invited trouble" by accompanying the accused to his house after consuming alcohol. A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih addressed the matter during a hearing on Tuesday. The Supreme Court bench cautioned judges against making such insensitive and unsubstantiated remarks in cases involving sexual violence. Justice Gavai emphasized that while bail decisions depend on the facts of each case, judges must exercise care and discretion in how they phrase their orders, especially when they relate to the complainant. “Yes, bail can be granted, but what is this discussion that she herself invited trouble? One has to be careful when saying such things, especially on this side,” said Justice ...

Poker and Rummy are Games of Skill, Not Gambling :  Allahabad High Court In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has affirmed that poker and rummy should be classified as games of skill rather than gambling. The decision came from a division bench comprising Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Manjeev Shukla, who delivered the judgment in response to a petition filed by DM Gaming Private Limited. Petition Filed by DM Gaming Private Limited DM Gaming Private Limited challenged an earlier order by the Agra City Commissionerate that denied the company permission to operate poker and rummy gaming units. The company filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the decision made by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Agra City Commissionerate, on January 24, 2024. Basis of the Petition: Games of Skill vs Gambling The crux of the petition rested on the legal distinction between games of skill and gambling. DM Gaming argued that poker and rummy have be...

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Abbas Ansari in Arms License Case The recent decision by the Supreme Court to grant bail to Abbas Ansari, son of gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari, in an arms license case has drawn attention and debate. The apex court, led by justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, carefully considered various factors before reaching its decision.  Legal Arguments and Considerations Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Abbas Ansari, argued vehemently that his client was falsely implicated in the case, pointing out inconsistencies in the chargesheet and providing documents. However, the Uttar Pradesh government opposed the petition, citing Abbas Ansari's alleged involvement in serious crimes and forgery accusations. Background of the Case The case stems from an FIR filed on October 12, 2019, which alleged that Abbas Ansari obtained firearms under a license by falsely claiming to be a renowned shooter. Despite the Allahabad High Court's previous denial of b...