Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC in a PMLA case. Investigation was complete and a complaint already filed, so no apprehension of arrest existed. Following Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement, the High Court dismissed 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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79428
Court No. - 29
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2592 of 2024
Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- Govt. Of India Thru. Assistant Director Directorate Of Enforcement U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Hemant Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rohit Tripathi
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 29.11.2024
Arvind
Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted where investigation is complete and complaint filed, so no apprehension of arrest exists.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tarsem Lal Vs. Directorate of EnforcementRelied on¶3
(2024) 7 SCC 61 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sunil Kumar Singh
Govt. Of India Thru. Assistant Director Directorate Of Enforcement U.P.
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
