Disposed¶13

Tajendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2025BAIL/44795/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tajendra bail application Criminal Misc. B.A. 44795 of 2025 Allahabad High Court Court No. 66 Samit Gopal J. December 18 2025 cryptic bail application proposed dismissal supplementary affidavit not filed relevant document unavailable case-diary A.G.A. perused counsel sought month adjournment no intention to argue toss it off matter listed 30.01.2026 Ansar Ahmad counsel applicant G.A. Bade Lal Bind counsel State State of U.P. opposite party

What did the court decide?

The matter was adjourned and listed for hearing on 30.01.2026; the bail application was not dismissed at this sitting. ¶13

Tajendra vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The matter was adjourned and listed for hearing on 30.01.2026; the bail application was not dismissed at this sitting.

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the bail application, which the Court found cryptic, warranted dismissal at the first instance notwithstanding counsel's reliance on paragraph 6 of the application regarding production of the relevant case document. +2 more

¶10

Court's answer

At the first instance the Court found the bail application cryptic and proposed to dismiss it.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded that the supplementary affidavit undertaken in paragraph 6 of the application to convey the relevant document of the case had not been filed.

¶10

Key takeaways

When called upon by the Court to argue the matter (after the case-diary available with the learned A.G.A. was called for perusal), learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the matter be adjourned for a month.ratio¶11
The Court assessed that counsel's request for adjournment instead of arguing clearly showed he had no intention to argue the matter but to only toss it off.ratio¶11
The Court adjourned the matter and directed that it be listed on 30.01.2026.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44795 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 66), Hon'ble Samit Gopal, J., decision dated December 18, 2025 — Applicant Tajendra v. State of U.P. At the first instance the Court found the bail application cryptic and proposed to dismiss it; learned counsel pointed to paragraph 6 of the application stating that the relevant document of the case was unavailable and would be produced by supplementary affidavit, but no such affidavit had been filed. The case-diary, available with the learned A.G.A., was called for perusal and counsel was asked to argue; instead he sought a month's adjournment, which the Court read as showing no intention to argue the matter but to only toss it off. The matter was accordingly adjourned and listed for 30.01.2026. No statutory provision or precedent was cited in this order-sheet.

Tajendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tajendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Pooja Pandey vs Suresh Chandra Pandey

Son Pal and Another vs Kishan Kumar

Deepak Bind vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Om Babu Alias Gatta vs State of U.P.

Sonu Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Lucknow

Juggan Alias Javed Ahmed vs State of U.P.