SUBHASH vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A. — NA528/4976/2026
Case under Andhra State Act Section 420,43-420. Next hearing: 26th May 2026.
CNR: UPHC010589522026
Filing Number
NA528/
Filing Date
28-Jan-2026
Registration No
NA528/4976/2026
Registration Date
02-Feb-2026
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATION ( 401500 )
Sub-Category
U/s 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of criminal Proceedings in State case ( 36 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Misc.
Last updated 03-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUBHASH
Adv. SURENDRA NATH TRIPATHI
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A.
-
2.SRI PRAVEEN KUMAR (JUNIOR ENGINEER)
Case History
-
26-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
26-May-2026
—
Saurabh Srivastava
-
19-May-2026
—
Saurabh Srivastava
-
11-May-2026
—
Saurabh Srivastava
-
04-May-2026
—
Saurabh Srivastava
-
27-Apr-2026
—
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
-
19-Feb-2026
Sanjay Kumar PachoriView PDF
Case Summary: NA528/4976/2026 Subhash filed a Section 528 BNSS petition to quash criminal proceedings (Crime No. 685/2020, under IPC Sections 379, 420) initiated by a UPPCL Junior Engineer regarding an incident from June/July 2019. Subhash contended the FIR was lodged on false allegations with ulterior motive to harass him, noting he was appointed as private labour only in 2020 and no pre-summoning evidence existed. The High Court found the matter prima facie required consideration and stayed further proceedings against the applicant pending completion of affidavits, ordering the case relisted after eight weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-Feb-2026
—
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
-
12-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
28-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. NA528/4976/2026
Case Summary: NA528/4976/2026 Subhash filed a Section 528 BNSS petition to quash criminal proceedings (Crime No. 685/2020, under IPC Sections 379, 420) initiated by a UPPCL Junior Engineer regarding an incident from June/July 2019. Subhash contended the FIR was lodged on false allegations with ulterior motive to harass him, noting he was appointed as private labour only in 2020 and no pre-summoning evidence existed. The High Court found the matter prima facie required consideration and stayed further proceedings against the applicant pending completion of affidavits, ordering the case relisted after eight weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts