Court dismissed anticipatory bail application due to lack of response by the applicant despite prior interim protection.
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. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9734 of 2021
Applicant :- Ummed Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
None responds for the applicant when the case is called out. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present.
Perusal of the order-sheet shows that the applicant was granted interim protection by an order dated 17.08.2021 and since then, on several dates of hearing none has responded on his behalf. Even today, none is present for the applicant.
Hence, this application for anticipatory bail is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order Date :- 5.1.2023 Saif
Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail absent the applicant.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ummed Singh Yadav
State of U.P.
Jyotsna Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
