Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 111 (ALL)

Amrita Raj Kumar Pandit v. State of U. P.

2024-01-10

KRISHAN PAHAL

body2024
JUDGMENT : 1. List has been revised. None has appeared to press this anticipatory bail application. Learned AGA is present for the State. In the circumstances, I myself have perused the record. 2. The instant anticipatory bail application was filed on 31.10.2019 and none was present on behalf of the applicant on the last three occasions also i.e. on 2.1.2024, 30.11.2023 and 16.11.2023. It cannot be allowed to swing years together in the cloak of pendency. On 30.11.2023, the following order was passed by this Bench:- "1. List has been revised. 2. No one is present on behalf of the applicant to press the present anticipatory bail application. Learned A.G.A. is present. 3. Issue notice to the applicant through C.J.M. concerned, returnable at an early date. 4. List this case on 02.01.2024 in the additional cause list." 3. Office report dated 21.12.2023 indicates that the applicant is not traceable at the given address and the notice has been returned unserved. 4. Learned A.G.A. has informed that in the instant anticipatory bail application, the prayer was made for granting the anticipatory bail in the event of arrest, i.e. till the submission of report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. He has further informed that the final report (charge sheet) has already been submitted in the matter, as such, it has been rendered infructuous. 5. Sub-Section 5 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. [Uttar Pradesh Act 4 of 2019, s. 2 (w.e.f. 1-6-2019)] says that the anticipatory bail application be finally disposed of within thirty days of the date of such application. The Apex Court in para-73(k) of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 has held that the application for anticipatory bail are expected to be disposed of within a period of six weeks. 6. The Apex Court in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, (2021) 12 SCC 612 has categorically held that courts shall not grant the adjournments in routine manner and mechanically and shall not be a party to cause for delay in dispensing the justice. 7. Under the circumstances, the instant anticipatory bail application has been rendered infructuous. 8. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. 9. Interim protection granted, if any, stands vacated.