State of Uttar Pradesh vs Mohd. Afzal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 1319

B. R. GAVAI, J. B. PARDIWALA
State of Uttar Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Afzal – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Adesh Kr. Gill, Mr. Suraj Pal Singh, Mr. R.K. Raizada Sr. AAG, Punjab, Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Mr. Shubham Saxena
For the Respondent: Mr. Mohd. Zahid Hussain, Mr. Camran Iqbal, Mr. Comred Iqbal, Mr. Anupam Mishra

Table of Content
1. court's order on appeal and application disposition (Para 1 , 2 , 12)
2. application for anticipatory bail and opposition (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. contradictory orders by high court discussed (Para 10 , 11)

ORDER :

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. The respondents-herein (applicant(s) before the High Court) had filed an application for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Leaned Single Judge of the High Court, therefore, after hearing the parties, found that the respondents were not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

8. However, after the application was rejected, a motion was made on behalf of the respondent(s) that they would like to move an application for discharge.

10. It is, thus, clear that self-contradictory orders have been passed by the High Court. On the one hand, the application for anticipatory bail is rejected and, on the other hand, the interim protection is granted for a period of two months.

12. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document