RAM KUSHAL @ MAIKU vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A. — NA528/7099/2026

Case under Andhra State Act Section 506,43-506. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.

Next hearing 24-Apr-2026

CNR: UPHC010984572026

Filing Number

NA528/

Filing Date

13-Feb-2026

Registration No

NA528/7099/2026

Registration Date

16-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

Andhra State Act Section 506,43-506

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAM KUSHAL @ MAIKU

    Adv. ASHUTOSH KUMAR MISHRA,RAJ BABU PATHAK,RAJ BABU PATHAK, ,RAJ BABU PATHAK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER Advocate - G.A.

  2. 2.MENKA

Case History

  1. 24-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    —

    Nand Prabha Shukla

  3. 17-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  4. 19-Feb-2026

    Tej Pratap TiwariView PDF

    Case Summary: In NA528/7099/2026, Ram Kushal filed a petition under Section 528 BNSS to quash cognizance proceedings against him involving charges under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354(B), 376 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court of Allahabad issued notice to the opposite party (victim) returnable at an early date. The court admitted both parties' contentions—the applicant argued medical examination showed no signs of alleged offense, while the State contended the FIR and victim's statement establish the offense. The case was adjourned with directions for the opposite party to file counter-affidavit within four weeks and no interim orders granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 13-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. NA528/7099/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: In NA528/7099/2026, Ram Kushal filed a petition under Section 528 BNSS to quash cognizance proceedings against him involving charges under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354(B), 376 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The High Court of Allahabad issued notice to the opposite party (victim) returnable at an early date. The court admitted both parties' contentions—the applicant argued medical examination showed no signs of alleged offense, while the State contended the FIR and victim's statement establish the offense. The case was adjourned with directions for the opposite party to file counter-affidavit within four weeks and no interim orders granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case