Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. filed in 2022. Counsel for the applicant had no instructions. Relying on Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement, the court held no order was required and disposed of the application.
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. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 137 of 2022
Applicant :- Alok Kumar Mitra Opposite Party :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravendra Pratap Singh,Lokendra Kumar Gupta,Mirza Humayun Qadar Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.S.G,Kuldeep Srivastava,Kuldeep Sr,Shiv P. Shukla
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State respondent.
The counsel for the applicant states that he has no instructions from his client.
The present application was filed in the year 2022.
Considering the law as explained in the case of Tarsem Lal Versus Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office, 2024 INSC 434 , no order is required to be passed.
The present application is disposed of with the observation that the law as explained in the case of Tarsem Lal Versus Directororte of Enforcement (Supra) shall be followed.
Order Date :- 27.5.2024 Arun
Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in an application pending since 2022 where counsel has no instructions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tarsem Lal Versus Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal OfficeRelied on
2024 INSC 434 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Alok Kumar Mitra
Union Of India
Pankaj Bhatia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
