Single judge dismissed the bail cancellation application under Section 439(2) CrPC as there was no representation from the applicant to press the matter, citing want of prosecution. Counsel for the State and opposite party were present.
Application dismissed for want of prosecution due to non-appearance of applicant.
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:139303
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 336 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt Urmila Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ali Hasan,Nisar Ahmed
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Order Date :- 13.7.2023 M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.)
Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow or dismiss the bail cancellation application when the applicant is absent and no representation is filed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt Urmila Devi
State of U.P.
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
