AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 198 wordsGirish Kathpalia, J
The accused/applicant seeks interim bail in case FIR No. 78/2026 of PS Pul Prahlad Pur for offence under Section 110/3(5) BNS.
It is 01:25 pm. This interim bail application has been received by way of second supplementary list after mentioning was allowed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.
At the outset, learned APP points out that the accused/applicant has not disclosed that his regular bail application is already pending before the trial court and is listed on 28.04.2026. As pointed out by learned APP, the trial court rejected the interim bail application on the ground that the marriage in question is not of an immediate family member of the accused/applicant and allegations against the accused/applicant are of serious nature.
Learned counsel for accused/applicant does not dispute that the bail application of the accused/applicant is pending before the Court of Sessions and this fact has not been disclosed in the present bail application. But learned counsel is unable to explain the reason behind concealment of pendency of bail application before the Court of Sessions.
The present interim bail application is dismissed in the above circumstances.
Accompanying applications also stand disposed of.