In this anticipatory bail application, neither applicant nor informant counsel appeared. The learned A.G.A. was present. The court held the application become infructuous due to delay and time lapse.
The anticipatory bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution and being infructuous. Any interim order stood 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. - 2684 of 2021
Applicant :- Kapil Kumar And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Tripathi,Sarvesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prem Chandra Dwivedi
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
List has been revised.
Neither the counsel for the applicants nor the counsel for the informant is present. 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 10:39:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kapil Kumar And 7 Others
State of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
Ravi Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
