HC grants parole to Atiq's lawyer Vijay Mishra
The Allahabad High Court has granted parole to Atiq's lawyer Vijay Mishra till May 26 to attend terahi of his mother. However, during the parole period, he shall remain in police custody on his expense, which shall be paid by him on or before his surrender, the court added.
Vijay Mishra is in jail on the charges of conspiracy in Umesh Pal murder case, where ex-MP and dreaded mafia turned politician Atiq is the main accused. He has also been booked under the Gangsters Act.
While passing this order, Justice Saurabh Srivastava observed, 'After hearing the rival submissions advanced by counsels for both the parties, on humanitarian ground, this court is of the opinion that applicant namely Vijay Mishra, may be permitted to attend the terahi of his mother in police custody, costs of which shall be borne by him', the court added in its order passed on May 21.
In the present petition filed by Vijay Mishra, his counsel submitted that the mother of applicant expired on May 10. The applicant has been languishing in Etawah jail since July 30, 2023.
The applicant filed an application before the court of special judge (Gangster Act), Prayagraj with prayer to allow him to appear in last ceremony of his mother, but the court below rejected the same prayer vide order dated May 14, 2025, which has been challenged through instant petition.
The counsel for applicant submitted that terahi of his mother is scheduled on May 23, 2025 and as such prays that applicant be released on short term parole to participate in the said ceremony.
However, during the court proceedings, the state counsel vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Allahabad HC grants interim anticipatory bail to Lucknow University prof booked over post on Pahalgam attack
The Allahabad High Court on Monday granted interim anticipatory bail to Dr Madri Kakoti, an Assistant Professor in the Linguistics Department of Lucknow University, who was booked by the Uttar Pradesh Police for her social media post reportedly concerning the deadly terror Pahalgam attack. KaKoti approached the Allahabad High Court after a court in Lucknow rejected her anticipatory bail plea in connection with the FIR registered against her under Sections 197(1), 353 (2), 196(1) (a) 352, 302, 152 of the Bhartiya Nyay Samhita (B.N.S) and Section 69A of the I.T. Act. She apprehended her arrest for the reason that an offence invoked in the FIR by the police is cognizable and is punishable up to life imprisonment, and the police are making every endeavour to arrest the applicant in the instant case. In her anticipatory bail plea, Kakoti contended that although the offence was registered on the basis of an alleged online post, the same has not even been mentioned or reproduced in the FIR, adding that the omission raised "serious questions about the legality and fairness of the registration of the FIR". "The FIR fails to mention even a single actual quote or post, despite the allegation resting entirely on the applicant's digital expressions," said Kakoti's plea. In her tweet, Kakoti allegedly said: "Shooting someone after asking about their religion is terrorism. Lynching someone after asking about their religion, firing them from their job after asking about their religion, not giving them a house after asking about their religion, bulldozing a house after asking about their religion, etc. is also terrorism. Recognize the real terrorist." The complainant, an office bearer of the RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), alleged that the varsity professor, through her social media account (@ms_medusssa), made anti-national and communally inflammatory remarks following the terrorist incident in J&K's Pahalgam.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Mahakumbh stampede: Allahabad HC slams UP government over delayed compensation; seeks full report
LUCKNOW: The Allahabad High Court has strongly criticised the Uttar Pradesh government for not extending compensation to the families of those who died in the Mahakumbh stampede on January 29, 2025. While hearing a petition on Saturday, the vacation bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Sandeep Jain said the government's attitude was 'unstable' and 'indifferent to the suffering of citizens.' The judges were responding to a petition filed by Uday Pratap Singh. The court asked the state government to submit full details of the deaths, injured patients, and medical staff involved in the treatment of stampede victims. It also ordered the government to explain what steps were taken to compensate the victim families. The court reminded the state government that it worked as a trustee of the people and must show sensitivity in such cases. It said the government should be more responsible and transparent in helping the victims and their families. It may be recalled that the stampede had taken place just around midnight on January 29, ahead of the Amrit Snan of Mauni Amavasya. The state government admitted that 30 people died and had announced a compensation of Rs 25 lakh each to the dependents of the deceased. However, the compensation has still not been given to the affected families.
News18
3 hours ago
- News18
‘SSP Will Be Personally Liable': Allahabad HC Grants Protection To Couple Amid Honour Killing Fears
Last Updated: The woman and her husband approached the High Court after the woman's father lodged an FIR under Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Reaffirming that personal liberty under Article 21 overrides social norms, the Allahabad High Court recently granted police protection to a couple fearing honour killing. The court held the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Bulandshahr, personally liable for any harm that befalls them. A division bench comprising Justice JJ Munir and Justice Anil Kumar was hearing a plea filed by a 23-year-old woman and her husband. The couple sought protection and relief from harassment following an FIR filed against them by the woman's father. Observing that both petitioners are adults and married of their own free will at Arya Samaj, Prayagraj, the court held, 'The social norms may dictate otherwise, but the Constitution grants them the freedom by virtue of Article 21 and the entire gamut of liberty guaranteed to an adult." The court also noted the allegations that the petitioners faced death threats from the woman's father and other family members. 'Given the prevalent social milieu, some kind of serious violence, even an honour killing, cannot be ruled out under such circumstances, where the informant has gone to the extent of lodging an FIR against an adult woman," the court remarked. The State, represented by AGA Deepak Mishra, questioned the validity of the Arya Samaj marriage, citing a previous decision (Shruti Agnihotri vs. Anand Kumar Srivastava, 2024 SCC OnLine 3701). However, the court maintained that both individuals, being adults, had the right to choose their life partner under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court also expressed shock at the police registering and investigating the FIR despite knowing both petitioners were adults. Acknowledging the gravity of the matter, the court issued notice to the respondents and granted them three weeks to file a counter affidavit. 'Until further orders of this Court, petitioners shall not be arrested in Case Crime No. 0445 of 2025 under Section 87 of the BNS, PS Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahr," the court ordered. The court also restrained the woman's father and family members from harassing or contacting the petitioners, directly or indirectly, through social media, telephone, or any other means, or forcibly separating the couple. Concluding the hearing, the court warned that the SSP, Bulandshahr, would be personally liable for any harm to the petitioners. The matter is listed for next hearing on July 7.
