Imran v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court rejected a bail application filed in 2015 due to the absence of the applicant's counsel to press the matter, despite the Supreme Court's direction to dispose of bail matters promptly.
What the court decided
Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1204 of 2015
Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajul Bhargava,C.K.Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,K.K.Dwivedi
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
No one is present on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application even in the revised call. Learned A.G.A. is present.
The Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (CRIMINAL) Diary No. 36869 of 2017 (Sanjay Dubey @ Rajesh Dubey vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Anti Corruption Bureau Ghaziabad) in the order dated 29.11.2017 has observed for disposal of bail matters within a period of one month, in the following terms:-
"In judgement of this Court in Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, this Court observed that in view of mandate of Article 21, the High Courts may dispose of the bail matters within a period of one month..."
In the instant case, the bail application is pending since 2015.
No one is present to press it.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail application pending since 2015, for which no representative of the applicant was present to press the matter, should be allowed in view of the Supreme Court's direction to dispose of
Whether the lack of presence of the applicant's counsel to press the bail application warrants rejection of the bail application.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Imran
Coram
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/1204/2015
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court