SANJEEV GAUR AND ANR vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR Advocate - PP, ASSAM — Crl.Pet./1526/2024
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 23rd April 2026.
CNR: GAHC010259552024
Filing Number
Crl.Pet./11227/2024
Filing Date
03-12-2024
Registration No
Crl.Pet./1526/2024
Registration Date
12-12-2024
Judge
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
Coram
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10263 - Criminal Revisions for quashing of criminal proceeding ( 221 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SANJEEV GAUR AND ANR
Adv. MR J C GAUR,MR D SAIKIA,MR D SAIKIA, ,MR D SAIKIA
SRI RANJIT KUMAR YADAV
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR Advocate - PP (Public Prosecutor), ASSAM
M/S ANONDITA HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.
Hearing History
Judge: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
ADMISSION
ADMISSION
ADMISSION
ADMISSION
ORDERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | ADMISSION |
| 08-04-2026 | ADMISSION |
| 30-03-2026 | ADMISSION |
| 25-03-2026 | ADMISSION |
| 04-11-2025 | ORDERS |
Orders
The Gauhati High Court upheld the trial court's cognizance order against two petitioners accused of stealing a surgical glove machine design from their former employer. The court rejected arguments that the Assam court lacked jurisdiction, finding that the design theft occurred within Assam's territory, satisfying multi-jurisdictional offense standards. The court also upheld the summoning on merits, finding the complainant's witnesses provided sufficient prima facie evidence of conspiracy, theft, and design violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Gauhati High Court upheld the trial court's cognizance order against two petitioners accused of stealing a surgical glove machine design from their former employer. The court rejected arguments that the Assam court lacked jurisdiction, finding that the design theft occurred within Assam's territory, satisfying multi-jurisdictional offense standards. The court also upheld the summoning on merits, finding the complainant's witnesses provided sufficient prima facie evidence of conspiracy, theft, and design violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts