Allahabad High Court
SMT. DUKHANTI DEVIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The bail cancellation application was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
Smt. Dukhanti Devi filed a bail cancellation application (No. 483 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court. The applicant's counsel did not appear to press the application, and no representative was present on her behalf. The State, represented by its brief holder, was present. The Court observed that the application could not be proceeded with in the absence of any party to prosecute it. Consequently, the Court dismissed the bail cancellation application for want of prosecution. No substantive merits of the bail cancellation were considered.
Issues considered
- What is the procedural consequence when an applicant fails to appear or have counsel present to prosecute a bail cancellation application?
Subjects
- bail cancellation
- procedural law
- want of prosecution
- High Court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 483 of 2025
Smt. Dukhanti Devi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Dubey, Shruti Shrinet,
Utpal Srivastav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sudhanshu Kumar Singh
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Case called out in the revised list. No one appears on behalf of the
applicant to press the instant application.
2. Accordingly, the application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
3. Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State is present.
(Vivek Varma,J.)
October 1, 2026
Vandana
Digitally signed by :-
VANDANA GAUTAM
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…