Case dismissed for want of prosecution and as being infructuous due to efflux of time. No applicant appeared to press the anticipatory bail application. 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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 125 of 2022
Applicant :- Rampratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arti Raje Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
List has been revised.
No one appears on behalf of the applicant to press this anticipatory bail application. Learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
As such, with the efflux of time, the anticipatory bail application seems to have become infructuous.
The same is dismissed for want of prosecution and being infructuous.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 20.9.2022 Ravi Kant
Digitally signed by RAVI KANT Date: 2022.09.21 10:38:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Rampratap Singh
State of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
