This court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for want of prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. Any interim order was vacated.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution; interim order vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2318 of 2020
Applicant :- Mukul Dev Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Saxena,Vijit Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Case called out in the revised list.
No one is present on behalf of the applicant to press this application. However, Kumari Meena, learned AGA for the State is present.
It transpires from the record that an interim order was passed in favour of the applicant on 6.3.2020 thereafter the matter was taken up by the Court on 2.9.2020 but the interim order was not extended.
In view of the above, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 24.9.2020 Deepika
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail application should be dismissed for want of prosecution due to the absence of the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukul Dev
Ramesh Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
