Dismissed
Pushpa Devi and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others
Allahabad HCABAIL/805/2020
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
This judgment deals with an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court observed that neither the applicant's counsel nor the informant's counsel appeared even after the revised call. Due to the efflux of time, the court held that the application had become infructuous. Consequently, the application was dismissed for want of prosecution, and any interim order granted earlier was vacated.
What did the court decide?
Anticipatory bail application dismissed for want of prosecution; interim order vacated.