Allahabad Court June 2011 Judgments
Asok Pande Vs. Union of India
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-22-2011
Pradeep Kant, J. (1) Heard Sri Asok Pande, who is one of the petitioners, Sri G.E.Vahanvati, learned Attorney General for India, Dr. Ashok Nigam, Additional Solicitor General of India, Sri I.H. Farooqui, Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents and Sri C.B. Pandey, as Intervenor. (2) This writ petition in the style of Public Interest Litigation challenges the resolution of the Government of India of April 8, 2011 issued by the Ministry of Law and Justice (for short, MoLJ) by which a Joint Drafting Committee for the purpose of drafting the Lok Pal Bill was constituted comprising five nominees of the Government of India and five nominees of Sri Anna Hazare (including himself). Challenge to the Resolution constituting the Joint Drafting Committee has been principally made on the following grounds: 1.that the impugned resolution is beyond any lawful provision and is completely extra-constitutional; 2.that it is settled that law-making is purely legislative act and, therefor...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Kumar BhasIn and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-14-2011
Shri Narayan Shukla, J. Heard Mr.Kunwar Mridul Rakesh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Vaibhav Kalia, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 28th of March, 2011, passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow framing charges against them under Sections 420, 467,468, 120-B IPC, in complaint case No.5260 of 2010. It is stated that the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 moved an application dated 29th of November, 1998, under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is yet to be disposed of. Similarly the petitioner No.3 also moved an application under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 19th of January, 2008, which was rejected by the learned Magistrate on 23rd of October, 2010 being premature as the evidence under Section 244 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was not adduced till then. Thereafter several opportunit...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›