JALDI

Jaldi-Vidhi

High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Case details and hearing information from the Constitution Bench Pendency Portal.

595

Message
show

High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh

This case will decide whether an interim order of the High Court can be automatically vacated after a specified period of time.

Petitioners Arguments
The directions in the Asian Resurfacing case are not binding precedent under Article 141. Additionally, the directions were issued by a three-judge bench without consideration of the judgements of a five-judge bench in Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak and seven-judge bench in P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka . Due to the conflict between the judgements in the afore-mentione cases, the High Court is bound to follow the decision of a larger bench.
Responders Arguments
This case involves substantial questions of Constitutional law and therefore must be referred to a larger Bench.
Start Date
2023-12-01
End Date
2024-02-29
Card Stage Date
2024-02-29
Review Petition No
Crl.A. No. 3589/2023
Case Status
Archive
Bench Status
Constituted
Subject Matter
Constitution
Comment
NA
Disposal Time
3 months

5 Judge Bench

Judgment delivered

Consider As Stage Of Pendency
false

Date of institution of case

Date of reference to 5 Judge Bench

Judgement pronounced

In Chandrapal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh , the applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the CrPC asking the High Court to stay the criminal trial ongoing against him. The Allahabad High Court granted an interim order staying the criminal trial. Due to the paucity of time and Court’s docket, the matter could not be heard on several occasions. The first informant moved the Trial Court on the grounds that the interim stay order stood vacated by virtue of the Supreme Court’s holding in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another v. Central Bureau of Investigation . Subsequently, the Trial Court began criminal proceedings and the applicant was eventually arrested. The application under Section 482 of the CrPC as well as the bail application were heard together by a Single Judge Bench of the Allahabad High Court and was subsequently referred to a Full Bench. The Full Bench, on 03-11-2023 , rejected the applications of the applicant but formulated numerous questions of constitutional importance and granted a Certificate forAppeal to the Supreme Court for consideration of those questions. The matter was heard by a Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court and was eventually referred to a Constitution Bench on 01-12-2023 .

Whether the directions issued in the Asian Resurfacing case require reconsideration? Whether the directions in the Asian Resurfacing case satisfy the ingredients of law laid down by the Supreme Court under Article 141 of the Constitution of India? Whether the directions in the Asian Resurfacing case are an instance of “judicial legislation” and are relatable to Article 142 of the Constitution of India?

NA

The decision in the Asian Resurfacing case was pronounced by a bench of three judges. Therefore, the Court deemed it to be appropriate to have the matter referred to a larger bench of five judges.

Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency v. Central Bureau of Investigation

The "resurfacing" conundrum of the Supreme Court's Asian Resurfacing verdict

The "resurfacing" conundrum of the Supreme Court's Asian Resurfacing verdict
Source Of Info
Bar and Bench
Date Of Fr
2023-07-05

Interlocutory Orders, Stay Of Trial Proceedings And Inherent Powers: A Discussion On ‘Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency (P) Ltd. v. CBI

Interlocutory Orders, Stay Of Trial Proceedings And Inherent Powers: A Discussion On ‘Asian Resurfacing Of Road Agency (P) Ltd. v. CBI
Source Of Info
SCC Times
Date Of Fr
2020-11-14

Decoding What the Good Lords Meant in Asian Resurfacing Judgment

Decoding What the Good Lords Meant in Asian Resurfacing Judgment
Source Of Info
The Leaflet
Date Of Fr
2020-11-01