Prayagraj (UP), Feb 2 (IANS) The Allahabad High Court on Friday refused to allow the Gyanvapi Mosque committee's plea seeking an interim stay on puja being performed in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi Mosque (known as Vyas Tehkhana).

However, the Court has directed the state government to maintain law and order situation in the area.

Puja inside the Tehkhana began on 31st January, shortly after the Varanasi District Judge passed an order directing the district magistrate to facilitate puja inside the area by making proper arrangements. The district magistrate complied with the order on the same day.

On Thursday, an appeal was moved by the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (which manages Gyanvapi mosque) challenging the order of the Varanasi District Court allowing Hindus to perform prayers in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi mosque (Vyas Ji ka Tehkhana).

The committee also sought a stay on the worship rituals.

In its application, the mosque committee has contended that the administration was acting in 'hot haste' soon after the Varanasi Court's order to allow the pooja at night itself. The application further argues that these actions, occurring in the middle of the night, aimed to pre-empt any legal challenge by the mosque managing committee.

While hearing the matter today, a Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal refused to grant any interim relief to the Mosque Committee as it stressed that it had not challenged Varanasi District Judge's January 17th order, wherein the district magistrate was appointed as a receiver.

The Court has granted it time till February 6 to amend its appeal and till then, the Court directed the Advocate General to maintain law and order situation in the area.

This development comes two days after the Supreme Court refused to urgently hear the Mosque Committee's plea against the order allowing puja Tehkhana, located at the southern cellar of the Mosque.

The Varanasi District Judge on January 31 directed the district administration to make appropriate arrangements within 7 days for Hindus to conduct worshipping rituals inside one of the sealed cellars/basement/tehkhana (vyas ji ka tehkhana) inside the existing Gyanvapi mosque complex.

Worship at this spot was stopped in the year 1993.

Prayagraj (UP), Dec 9 (IANS) The Allahabad High Court has observed that marital rape cannot be considered an offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) if the wife is above the age of 18.

The court made these remarks while acquitting a husband of charges of committing an 'unnatural offence' against his wife.

While holding that the accused in this case cannot be convicted under Section 377 of the IPC, the bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narain Mishra stated that marital rape has not been criminalised in this country as yet.

The High Court also noted that since the petitions seeking the criminalisation of marital rape are still pending before the Supreme Court, there is no criminal penalty for marital rape when the wife is 18 years of age or older until the top court decides the matter.

The Allahabad High Court, endorsing a previous observation of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, also stated that there is no place for any 'unnatural offence' (as per IPC Section 377) to take place in a marital relationship.

In her plea, the complainant alleged that their marriage was an abusive relationship, and the husband allegedly subjected her to verbal and physical abuse and coercion, including acts of sodomy.

The court convicted him under sections related to cruelty by the husband or relatives of the husband (498-A) and voluntarily causing hurt (IPC 323) while acquitting him of charges under Section 377.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court agreed to list pleas to criminalise marital rape.

The Central government had submitted before the top court that criminalising marital rape would have "social ramifications".

Prayagraj (UP), Oct 8 (IANS) The Allahabad High Court has dissolved a marriage, emphasising the significance of individual happiness over forcing a couple to live together.

The decision came on Tuesday on a first appeal filed by Ashok Jha, the husband, challenging the rejection of his petition for divorce by the principal judge of the family court in Ghaziabad on November 7, 2019.

The division bench, comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, found that compelling a couple to live together was more prejudicial to public interest than the dissolution of the marriage.

The case revolved around allegations of cruelty suffered by the husband and the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. Both parties had levelled accusations against each other, ranging from infidelity to false criminal complaints, and they had been living separately for over a decade.

The court took into account the numerous complaints filed by the wife against her husband, as well as his counterclaims. It was evident that every effort had been made to harass and torment him, with no inclination for reconciliation on the part of the wife.

The court cited legal precedents, including the case of Naveen Kohli Vs Neelu Kohli (2006) (4) SCC 558, which established that filing false complaints against a spouse amounted to cruelty.

In the backdrop of this complex situation, the court dissolved the marriage, recognising both the cruelty suffered by the husband and the irretrievable breakdown of the relationship.

Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh commented on the case, saying, “Forcing the parties to live together despite their intense animosity towards each other will amount to cruelty.”

The verdict sets a significant precedent, emphasising the importance of protecting individuals from marital suffering and respecting their right to choose their own path to happiness.

Prayagraj, July 26 (IANS) The Allahabad High Court has said that the youth, under the influence of the social media, movies, web series were not able to decide about the correct course of their life and in search of the right soulmates, they often landed in the company of wrong people.

While granting bail to a person accused of abetment to suicide on Tuesday, Justice Siddharth allowed bail application of the applicant Jai Govind a.k.a Ramji Yadav who was accused of abetment to suicide of a girl, with whom he purportedly had a love affair.

The court said: “This is one of the many cases in the court where the youth in this country are spoiling their lives due to lure of free relationship with the member of the opposite sex, aping western culture and not finding any real soulmate in the end.

"The social media, movies show that multiple affairs and infidelity to the spouse are normal and this inflames the imagination of impressionable minds and they start experimenting with the same, but they do not fit in the prevailing societal norm."

The court further said that the young generation, unaware of the consequences of following the western culture, was entering into relationships after being influenced by content being shown on social media, movies and later, after denial of social recognition to their choice of partner, they become “disillusioned”.

“They behave sometimes against the society, sometimes against their parents and sometimes also against the partner of their choice when they do not find any way out from the predicament in which they land after entering into such relationships,” added the court.

The prosecution case was that the applicant and the victim were having a love affair.

On May 8, 2022 she was allegedly kidnapped and raped by the applicant and other co-accused people for four days as a result of which she suffered depression.

She was again abducted on June 9, 2022 and thereafter, left in the market.

She met her sister and told her that she had been given a sedative and thereafter raped by the accused persons who made her video.

After that, she consumed a mosquito repellent and was taken to hospital where she died on June 10, 2022. 

Prayagraj (UP), July 12 (IANS)  The Allahabad High Court has stated that a woman cannot be forced to give birth to the child of a man who has sexually assaulted her.