Hameed Khan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Anticipatory bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution and being infructuous due to absence of the applicant.
What did the court decide?
Dismissal of anticipatory bail application due to want of prosecution and infructuousness.
What the court decided
Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 198 of 2020
Applicant :- Hameed Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Fakhruzzaman Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
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 :- 19.10.2022 Siddhant
Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.10.19 15:09:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Hameed Khan
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Krishan Pahal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · October
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/198/2020
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court