The Allahabad High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. as infructuous for lack of prosecution, noting the applicant failed to appear.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution and being infructuous; 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. - 13451 of 2021
Applicant :- Ruby Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Kalim
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
None is present on behalf of the applicant(s) to press the application even in the revised call. 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 :- 21.10.2022 Siddhant
Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.10.21 18:43:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant turns infructuous due to lack of appearance for over three months.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ruby
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
