The High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed in 2021 as infructuous due to the absence of the applicant's counsel and excessive delay. The court cited statutory directions to dispose of such applications promptly.
Application dismissed as infructuous; interim protection granted, if any, stands 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166645
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 15936 of 2021
Applicant :- Madun Singh Bhati And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Sahu,Ravi Sahu Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
Order Date :- 18.8.2023 Siddhant
Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an anticipatory bail application filed in 2021, where no one appeared for nearly two years, can still be effectively adjudicated.
Whether an application rendered infructuous by the efflux of time should be dismissed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar AntilReferred¶8
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 · Who else cites this
Mali Rathod v. GopalReferred¶9
Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Madun Singh Bhati And Another
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
