NISHANT MITTAL SOHINI ADHIKARI vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR — CRR /4027/2025

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973 Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 23rd March 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0429162025

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

09th September 2025

Filing Number

CRR /4005/2025

Filing Date

04-09-2025

Registration No

CRR /4027/2025

Registration Date

04-09-2025

Judge

HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE

Coram

HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )

Sub-Category

Quashing of Proceedings ( 75 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL SECTION

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure ,1973 Section 482
THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 Section 528

Petitioner(s)

NISHANT MITTAL SOHINI ADHIKARI

Respondent(s)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

MANAJIT PAL

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE

09-09-2025

NEW MOTION

16-03-2026

TO BE MENTIONED

15-09-2025

MOTION 1

12-09-2025

MOTION

11-09-2025

MOTION

Orders

23-03-2026
HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE

The court quashed criminal proceedings (G.R. Case No. 6366 of 2022) against petitioner Nishant Mittal, a director of PCM Steel Pvt. Ltd., after the parties amicably settled their commercial dispute over delayed payment. The court found that since the complainant received full payment of Rs. 3,05,620 and declined to proceed further, continuing the criminal case would constitute abuse of process with no realistic prospect of conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court quashed criminal proceedings (G.R. Case No. 6366 of 2022) against petitioner Nishant Mittal, a director of PCM Steel Pvt. Ltd., after the parties amicably settled their commercial dispute over delayed payment. The court found that since the complainant received full payment of Rs. 3,05,620 and declined to proceed further, continuing the criminal case would constitute abuse of process with no realistic prospect of conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case