Sachin Pal v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
Bail application dismissed for want of prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the matter despite it being taken up in the revised list.
Bail application dismissed for want of prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the applicant to press the matter despite it being taken up in the revised list.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7285 of 2021
Applicant :- Sachin Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Avanish Pratap Singh,Udai Bhan Singh
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Matter taken up in the revised list.
No one appears on behalf of the applicant to press this bail application.
Ms. Babita Kumari, learned counsel for the State is present. Sri Avanish Pratap Singh and Sri Udai Bhan Singh, learned counsels for the first informant are also not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
The bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 17.2.2022 M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ARIF Date: 2022.02.17 18:30:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Sachin Pal
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