The High Court dismissed the second bail application for want of prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the matter after the list was revised.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18531 of 2022
Applicant :- Rohitash Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Nand Shukla,Mata Achal Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Gautam,Vimlesh Gautam
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
List revised. No one appears on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application.
Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State is present. Sri Raj Kumar Gautam and Sri Vimlesh Gautam, learned counsels for the first informant are also not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
This is second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant being Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 28019 of 2021 (Rohitash Sharma Vs. State of U.P.) was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.08.2021.
The application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 22.8.2022 M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ARIF Date: 2022.08.22 18:14:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Rohitash Sharma
State of U.P.
Samit Gopal
Mohammad Arif
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
