This petition for anticipatory bail under S. 438 Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka because the petitioners failed to comply with sufficient opportunities for complying with office objections. No substantive grounds were examined.
Petition dismissed for non-compliance with office objections.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1151/2021
BETWEEN:
R/O J-102,
(BY SRI.NEERAJ KUMAR CHADHA, PARTY-IN-PERSON - ABSENT)
2
AND:
STATE OF HARYANA AT THE INSTANCE OF THE HEAD CONSTABLE/POLICE IN-CHARGE OF CITY POLICE STATION PANIPAT – 132103 REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
...RESPONDENT
THIS PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C BY THE PARTYIN-PERSON PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO THAT THIS HON’BLE HIGH COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO APPLICANTS TO THE EFFECT THAT IN THE EVENT OF ARREST BY HARYANA POLICE THE APPLICANTS SHALL BE RELEASED ON BAIL ON PERSONAL BOND AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In spite of sufficient opportunities to comply with the
office objections, the same have not been complied with.
Hence, this petition is dismissed for non-compliance of
office objections.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NBM
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition filed under S. 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail should be allowed despite non-compliance with office objections.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
NEERAJ KUMAR CHADHA AND ORS
STATE OF HARYANA
RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
