In a recent event at the Allahabad High Court, Judge Krishan Pahal denied a request for anticipatory bail, highlighting concerns about long delays and lawyers not showing up for court. The case involved a petition from someone named Jhinnu against the State of Uttar Pradesh and two others. But when the court date came, the lawyer for Jhinnu, Dhirendra Pratap Singh, didn’t appear, raising worries about possible professional misconduct and misuse of the legal system.
“Non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant amounts to professional misconduct,” noted Justice Pahal, highlighting the seriousness of the matter. The judge emphasized that the mere pendency of a bail application does not grant any inherent right to the applicant, condemning the practice of exploiting procedural delays for personal advantage.
“It cannot be allowed to swing years together in the cloak of
pendency,” remarked Justice Pahal, expressing disdain towards the misuse of legal procedures.
The judge reiterated why there are time limits for deciding anticipatory bail requests, saying it’s to stop them from being misused. Referring to past cases, especially one called Ishwarlal Mali Rathod v. Gopal, Justice Pahal said it’s the court’s job to make legal processes faster and stop unnecessary delays. He said it’s important for everyone to take part in legal proceedings and criticized any attempts to avoid investigation or make justice take longer. Because the trial related to this case had already finished, the request for anticipatory bail didn’t matter anymore. So, the court rejected the request and took away any temporary protection the person had before.
“While the applicant retains the liberty to pursue regular application before the court concerned if required,” concluded Justice Pahal, ensuring the applicant’s legal recourse despite the dismissal of the anticipatory bail application.
