Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

“Court Finds ‘Presumptive Grounds’ Insufficient for Denying ‘No Objection Certificate’ for Meat Shop”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Lucknow, 29th August 2023 – In a landmark decision, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, comprising Hon’ble Vivek Chaudhary, J. And Hon’ble Manish Kumar, J., ruled in favor of Mohd. Shakeel, who had petitioned against the rejection of his application for a ‘No Objection Certificate’ to open a retail meat shop.

The court observed that the “ground of unauthorized meat sales is presumptive and not a valid reason for refusing the ‘no objection certificate.’” [Para 4]

The petitioner had approached the court after his application was rejected based on an unfavorable police report. The report cited the shop’s proximity to religious places and the likelihood of unauthorized meat sales as reasons for the rejection. [Para 1-3]

Highlighting an inconsistency in the application of rules, the court noted that “other meat shops in the same area have received ‘no objection certificates.’” The court further stated that “no religious places are within a 50-meter radius of these shops,” thereby questioning the validity of the police report. [Para 5-6]

In light of these observations, the court directed the Superintendent of Police to “reconsider the matter and pass a fresh order within four weeks.” [Para 7] The licencing authority was also instructed to consider the matter in accordance with the law.

The writ petition stands allowed, and the matter is to be reconsidered, marking a significant step towards ensuring fair and consistent application of rules and regulations.

Date of Decision: 29.8.2023

Mohd. Shakeel vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Supply

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Allh.HC_.pdf"]

Latest Legal News