Dismissed¶11

Sauvir Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2023BAIL/52340/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail; Section 438(5) Cr.P.C.; Uttar Pradesh Act 4 of 2019, s. 2; statutory 30-day disposal timeline; six-week disposal per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2022 SCC Online SC 825; no routine adjournments per Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612; non-appearance of applicant's counsel; application rendered infructuous by efflux of time; dismissal as infructuous; vacation of interim protection; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 72; Justice Krishan Pahal; Neutral Citation 2023:AHC:186406; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 52340 of 2019; applicant Sauvir Singh; opposite party State of U.P.

What did the court decide?

Where the trial appears to have concluded or the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter, the anticipatory bail application is rendered infructuous by efflux of time. ¶10

Sauvir Singh Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:186406

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52340 of 2019

¶4

Applicant :- Sauvir Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shikhar Vats,Viquar Mehdi Zaidi (Senior Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. None of the two counsels who represent the applicants have appeared to press this anticipatory bail application. Learned AGA is present for the State. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record. Learned AGA could not apprise this Court about the present status of the trial.

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application was filed in the year 2019. None was present on behalf of the applicant on 21.8.2023, 29.8.2023 & 18.9.2023. It cannot be allowed to swing years together in the cloak of pendency.

¶8

Sub-Section 5 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. [Uttar Pradesh Act 4 of 2019, s. 2 (w.e.f. 1-6-2019)] says that the anticipatory bail application be finally disposed of within thirty days of the date of such application. The Apex Court in para-73(k) of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 has held that the application for anticipatory bail are expected to be disposed of within a period of six weeks.

¶9

The Apex Court in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612 has categorically held that courts shall not grant the adjournments in routine manner and mechanically and shall not be a party to cause for delay in dispensing the justice.

¶10

It appears that either the trial has concluded or the applicant(s) has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Therefore, by the efflux of time, it seems to have been rendered infructuous.

¶11

The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous .

¶12

Interim protection granted, if any, stands vacated.

¶13

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶14

Order Date :- 26.9.2023 Siddhant

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sauvir Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sauvir Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhu Jaiswal and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Sharan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Arun Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Ali Hassan @ Ali Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Bhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.