Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

TAUSEEF RAZA @ ADILversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided

Holding

The anticipatory bail application was dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh application.

Summary

The applicant, Tauseef Raza @ Adil, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (BNSS No. 10158 of 2026) before the Allahabad High Court. Counsel for the applicant argued that the application contained glaring procedural defects that could not be cured by amendment. The court examined the claim and found the defects to be fatal, rendering the application not pressed. Consequently, the court dismissed the anticipatory bail application, granting the applicant liberty to file a fresh application if desired. The court also directed the return of certified copies to the applicant's counsel after photocopying, in accordance with procedural rules.

Issues considered

  • Whether an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 CrPC can be dismissed for procedural defects without allowing amendment

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 482 CrPC
  • procedural defects
  • application dismissal
  • high court

Judgment

                                                   HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                                        CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                                                                - 10158 of 2026

                                    Tauseef Raza @ Adil
                                                                                               .....Applicant(s)
                                                                      Versus

                                    State of U.P. and Another
                                                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                                                        Party(s)

                                    Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Upendra Kumar Singh
                                    Counsel for Opposite Party(s)              :   G.A.

                                    Court No. - 72
                                                        HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

                                    1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that there
                                    are some glaring defects in the application, which cannot be rectified by
                                    way of amendment application. Therefore, present application be
                                    dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the applicant to file fresh
                                    application.

                                    2. Accordingly, present application is dismissed as not pressed with
                                    liberty aforesaid.

                                    3. Office is directed to return certified copies to learned counsel for the
                                    applicant after obtaining photocopies of the same as per rules.



                                                                                       (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
                                    September 29, 2026
                                    Lalit Shukla




Digitally signed by :-
LALIT KUMAR SHUKLA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.