Latest news with #SubhashVidyarthi
Hans India
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
UP govt asked to distribute cooked food under ICDS
Lucknow: The Allahabad High Court on Friday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to distribute hot cooked food and take-home food under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), instead of the dry nutrition model currently in place. A Lucknow bench of Justices A R Masoodi and Subhash Vidyarthi disposed of several PILs that challenged the government's approach. The judgment, reserved on July 29, was a culmination of an ongoing legal battle over the ICDS scheme's implementation. The court observed that the ICDS scheme, a 50-year-old initiative, must be implemented in its 'true sense' to effectively tackle the problem of malnutrition among its beneficiaries, which include children up to six years of age, and pregnant and lactating women. The PILs, filed by Lakhimpur resident Shipra Devi and others, argued that the state government's decision to distribute dry nutrition locally through self-help groups (SHGs) violated the scheme's original rules, which mandate the provision of hot cooked meals and take-home food. While the government defended its policy, arguing that the new system would provide better local-level nutrition and that the PILs were not legally maintainable, the court disagreed. It emphasized that while empowering SHGs is a 'welcome approach,' such a policy cannot justify the 'violation of statutory mandates and provisions contained in the relevant rules and regulations'.
The Print
01-08-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Allahabad HC directs UP govt to distribute hot cooked food, take-home food under ICDS
The judgment, reserved on July 29, was a culmination of an ongoing legal battle over the ICDS scheme's implementation. A Lucknow bench of Justices A R Masoodi and Subhash Vidyarthi disposed of several PILs that challenged the government's approach. Lucknow, Aug 1 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court on Friday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to distribute hot cooked food and take-home food under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), instead of the dry nutrition model currently in place. The court observed that the ICDS scheme, a 50-year-old initiative, must be implemented in its 'true sense' to effectively tackle the problem of malnutrition among its beneficiaries, which include children up to six years of age, and pregnant and lactating women. The PILs, filed by Lakhimpur resident Shipra Devi and others, argued that the state government's decision to distribute dry nutrition locally through self-help groups (SHGs) violated the scheme's original rules, which mandate the provision of hot cooked meals and take-home food. While the government defended its policy, arguing that the new system would provide better local-level nutrition and that the PILs were not legally maintainable, the court disagreed. It emphasized that while empowering SHGs is a 'welcome approach,' such a policy cannot justify the 'violation of statutory mandates and provisions contained in the relevant rules and regulations'. PTI COR CDN ZMN This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Scroll.in
17-07-2025
- Scroll.in
Allahabad HC acquits man after 9 years' imprisonment, flags misuse of POCSO in property cases
The Allahabad High Court has acquitted a man convicted of raping his minor cousin and observed that allegations of offences such as child sexual abuse were increasingly being levelled in property dispute cases. The man spent nine years in jail. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi made the observation while hearing the appeal of the man against a 2020 judgement of a sessions court. The trial court had sentenced him to 20 years of imprisonment in 2020. He had been convicted for rape and under sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The man was booked on March 18, 2016, based on the complaint filed by his minor cousin. The complainant had alleged that the man had raped her. A medico-legal examination of the minor, conducted on March 20, 2016, said that the date and time of the alleged rape were not known. In its July 10 order, the High Court said that the medico-legal examination had not found injuries to the girl. The evidence does not prove that the man had raped the girl, the court said. It added that the trial court had convicted the man 'without proper appreciation of evidence on record and without giving due weight to the medico-legal examination report and the pathological examination report' of the minor. The bench said: 'The courts cannot shut their eyes to the ground realities apparent from the fact that now a days it has become very common to level allegation of commission of serious and heinous offences, including offence of rape or sexual abuse of a child by the family members, in petty disputes or in order to grab property.' The man lived alone in his house, from where he was taken into custody in 2016, and 'although he had sought protection of his property by the court, it appears that no action was taken in this regard', Justice Vidyarthi observed. 'The appellant has been made to languish in jail for more than nine years in a case in which there is no evidence to prove his guilt,' the court said, directing the police to ensure that the man is given possession of the house. In June 2016, the man had told the trial court that the path to his house had been closed, and alleged that his father was being given death threats. He had requested the court for directions to file a case against the persons who were harassing his father and who had implicated him in the rape case. The High Court said in its order: 'Keeping in view the nature of allegations, the finding recorded in the medico-legal examination report that there was no evidence of recent sexual penetration, cannot be brushed aside.' The court noted that the allegations of rape against the man were not supported by the findings of the medico-legal examination report and that the prosecution had relied on statements of the girl, her parents and that no independent witness was examined.
News18
02-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
‘Scandalous, Contemptuous': Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea Accusing Trial Judge Of Bribery
Last Updated: The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said that the allegations were not only false and vague but also appeared to be a calculated attempt to delay judicial proceedings. The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) recently dismissed a plea by former LACFEDD Managing Director Brahma Prakash Singh seeking transfer of a money laundering trial on allegations that the special judge demanded a Rs 1 crore bribe for his acquittal. The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said that the allegations were not only false and vague but also appeared to be a calculated attempt to delay judicial proceedings. Singh, who is facing trial under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) based on a 2018 Enforcement Directorate (ED) complaint, had approached the high court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the sessions court's refusal to transfer the case. Court noted that Singh had been convicted earlier in a corruption case and was currently out on bail during the pendency of his appeal. The bribery allegation against the special judge surfaced for the first time in December 2024—nearly three months after the alleged demand was made in court, and notably after the trial court had passed multiple orders against him. 'Apparently, the transfer application has been devised to avoid facing trial before the court," the high court observed. The sessions judge, who earlier rejected Singh's transfer request, had sought comments from the trial judge. The latter outright denied the bribery allegations, stating that no such interaction could have occurred without the presence of court staff and prosecutors. He also accused Singh and his counsel of trying to mount pressure on the court and disrupt proceedings. Singh's counsel, who admitted to receiving the alleged bribe demand by the special judge, told the high court that he delayed reporting it to avoid conflict with a judicial officer. However, the high court found this explanation implausible and inconsistent with conduct expected from a legal professional. What drew even sharper judicial rebuke were Singh's allegations against a sitting high court judge. The transfer application claimed that Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan had deliberately refused to pass an interim order in a Section 482 CrPC plea, even though the petition had merit. Justice Vidyarthi termed these claims 'scandalous and contemptuous," reiterating the Supreme Court's precedent that statements recorded in judicial orders cannot be questioned by extraneous evidence. 'I find myself in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned sessions judge," the bench held, adding that Singh's writ petition lacked merit and deserved outright dismissal.
New Indian Express
05-06-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Defamation case: Rahul's plea on summons nixed
LUCKNOW: Asserting that freedom of speech and expression was a subject to reasonable restrictions and it did not include the freedom to make statements defamatory to any person or defamatory to the Indian Army , the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad HC, on May 29, dismissed Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's plea challenging a lower court summons in a defamation case over alleged derogatory remarks about the Indian Army during his Bharat Jodo Yatra. Single judge bench, comprising Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, observed that material on record made a prima facie case against Rahul Gandhi for making defamatory statement against Indian Army and hence the summoning order of lower court could not be set aside and he has to stand on trial. The case pertains to a complaint filed by Uday Shanker Srivastava, ex-Director, Border Roads Organisation (a position equivalent to a Colonel in the Indian Army). Srivastava alleged that on Rahul Gandhi, during his 'Bharat Jodo Yatra' made disparaging comments about a face-off between the Indian and Chinese armies in Arunachal Pradesh.
