Applicants sought anticipatory bail under S. 438 CrPC but did not appear. The High Court Machine dismissed the application for want of prosecution.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution.
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. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9743 of 2021
Applicant :- Raj Bahadur And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narendra Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
None appeared for the applicants.
Learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
From perusal of order-sheet it appears that on previous date also no one has appeared on behalf of applicants to press the instant application for anticipatory bail. It appears that applicants are not interested in pursuing the matter.
In view of aforesaid, the instant application for anticipatory bail is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 1.8.2022 Ashish
Digitally signed by ASHISH Date: 2022.08.03 11:35:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Bahadur And 3 Others
Raj Beer Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
