The Allahabad High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application held inapplicable because the applicant faced no apprehension of arrest, as the investigation was completed and a complaint filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed.
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. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70501
Court No. - 18
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2262 of 2024
Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- Govt. Of India Thru. Assistant Director Directorate Of Enforcement Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Hemant Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rohit Tripathi,Shiv P. Shukla
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
reason.
( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )
Order Date :- 18.10.2024 A.Nigam
Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when there is no apprehension of arrest given that the investigation is completed and a complaint has already been filed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tarsem Lal Vs. Directorate of EnforcementReferred¶8
Tarsem Lal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement: (2024) 7 SCC 61 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dinesh Kumar Srivastava
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
