The Single Judge dismissed an unopposed anticipatory bail application filed in 2019 as infructuous due to a prolonged delay of over five years and lack of appearance by the applicant, holding that interim protection stands vacated.
Vacated any interim protection previously granted. Application dismissed as infructuous.
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:173095
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52182 of 2019
Applicant :- Faim @ Fahiem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
Order Date :- 28.8.2023 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 2019 should be allowed after more than five years of inactivity and efflux of time.
Whether the failure of parties to appear for over three years renders the application infructuous and liable to be dismissed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶8
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 SCC Online SC 825 · Who else cites this
Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. GopalReferred¶9
Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Faim @ Fahiem
State of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
Siddhant Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
