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
15 paragraphs · 236 wordsRajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J
I.A. No.15210/2021, an application for urgent hearing during summer vacation is taken up, considered and allowed for the reasons mentioned therein.
This is the first bail application under Section 438 of CrPC filed by the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.07/2021 registered at Police Station Umari, District Bhind (M.P.) for offence under
Sections 379, 414 of I.P.C. and section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals Act and section 3/181, 5/180 of Motor Vehicles Act.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant prays for withdrawal of the present anticipatory bail application with liberty to surrender before
the trial Court and move an application for regular bail. He further submits that the trial Court be directed to decide the application filed for regular bail
by the applicant as expeditiously as possible.
Prayer is allowed.
Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the applicant to surrender before the Trial Court and move
an application for regular bail.
Trial Court is directed to decide the regular bail application, if filed by the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
It is made clear that the trial Court shall not be influenced in any manner by the order passed by this Court. The application shall be considered and
decided on its own merits.
Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.