Lucknow Bench Judgments — September 2025

Advocate Akhil Kumar Singh lucknow-benchallahabad-high-courtjudgmentslegal-awareness

This is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified advocate.

Notable Judgments — September 2025

Jagdish Prasad vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Case No.Writ-C No. 39268 of 2015 (with connected petitions Nos. 20680 of 2016 and 14804 of 2025)
Date18 September 2025
BenchHon’ble Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
SubjectLand Acquisition — Lapsing of Proceedings under 2013 Act

The petitioners challenged land acquisition proceedings initiated in 1988-1989 for the Indirapuram residential scheme, arguing that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and that compensation was never properly paid. The court dismissed both petitions, finding that the acquisition had achieved finality through prior judicial approval up to the Supreme Court, that the petitioner’s father had received 80% compensation in June 1990, and that a pending reference seeking enhanced compensation precluded simultaneous claims for lapsing of the acquisition.

Key Legal Principle: Land acquisition proceedings that have achieved judicial finality cannot be re-challenged through fresh writ petitions. A pending reference for enhanced compensation is inconsistent with simultaneously claiming that the acquisition has lapsed for non-payment.


Mohammad Rizwan Khan vs State Of U.P. And Another

Case No.Criminal Revision No. 819 of 2024
Citation2025:AHC:157969
Date8 September 2025
BenchHon’ble Justice Madan Pal Singh
SubjectMaintenance under Section 125 CrPC — Procedural Fairness

The revision challenged a Family Court order awarding monthly maintenance of Rs. 30,000 to the wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The husband contended that the court had improperly decided the maintenance claim without first addressing two critical pending applications — one under Section 125(4) alleging the wife was living in adultery and thus ineligible for maintenance, and another under Section 340 alleging fabrication of documents. The High Court found the trial court’s approach procedurally defective, set aside the maintenance order, and directed the lower court to decide both applications within six weeks before addressing the maintenance claim afresh within two months.

Key Legal Principle: Family Courts must adjudicate preliminary applications challenging maintainability or alleging fraud before deciding maintenance claims on merits. Failure to do so constitutes a procedural defect that the High Court may correct in revision.


Usha Mishra vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh

Case No.SLP (Crl.) No. 8179 of 2025
Date23 September 2025
BenchHon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon’ble Justice R. Mahadevan (Supreme Court)
SubjectAnticipatory Bail — Fraud and Forgery Charges

The Supreme Court heard an appeal against a Lucknow Bench order rejecting the anticipatory bail application of a 71-year-old appellant in a case registered under IPC sections covering fraud-related offenses including forgery and criminal conspiracy (FIR No. 343 of 2015). Despite the prosecution’s argument that her involvement in the transaction was apparent, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and granted anticipatory bail, noting that no chargesheet had been filed against the appellant despite years of investigation and that she had cooperated fully with authorities. Bail conditions included Rs. 25,000 cash security with two sureties and full cooperation in trial proceedings.

Key Legal Principle: In cases involving elderly accused persons where investigation has been prolonged without a chargesheet being filed and where there is full cooperation with authorities, courts may be inclined to grant anticipatory bail with appropriate conditions.


For a complete list of orders passed in September 2025, refer to the Allahabad High Court website and Indian Kanoon.


Useful Resources

For full text of judgments and orders, readers may refer to:


Disclaimer: The information provided above is for general legal awareness and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, solicitation, or advertisement. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their circumstances. The summaries above are based on publicly available information from Indian Kanoon and official court records.

Share this article