https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295727 Prior notice to the Government Advocate or public prosecutor before presenting an anticipatory bail application before the High Court was held not to be mandatory under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 read with Section 438(3) CrPC. The court distinguished notice requirements for bail proceedings from notice after an interim order in anticipatory bail matters, and emphasised that such applications should be heard urgently so that prompt instructions from the State do not frustrate speedy justice. Interim anticipatory bail was granted in favour of the applicant pending further hearing. en-us Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:06:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295727 Prior notice to the Government Advocate or public prosecutor before presenting an anticipatory bail application before the High Court was held not to be mandatory under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 read with Section 438(3) CrPC. The court distinguished notice requirements for bail proceedings from notice after an interim order in anticipatory bail matters, and emphasised that such applications should be heard urgently so that prompt instructions from the State do not frustrate speedy justice. Interim anticipatory bail was granted in favour of the applicant pending further hearing. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295727