Harihara Ravi Iyer vs THE STATE — 764/2023

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 21st May 2026.

Case disposed

Cr Rev - CRIMINAL REVISION

CNR: DLND010105982023

e-Filing Number

12-12-2023

Filing Number

4032/2023

Filing Date

12-Dec-2023

Registration No

764/2023

Registration Date

14-Dec-2023

Court

District and Sessions Judge,New Delhi, PHC

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

21-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1791

Police Station

Tilak Marg

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Harihara Ravi Iyer

    Adv. Nikhil Kapoor

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-May-2026

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  3. 21-May-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

    The Principal District & Sessions Judge dismissed Harihara Ravi Iyer's revision petition challenging the trial court's rejection of his application for FIR registration in a forged Board Resolution case against multiple respondents. The court held that since all evidence supporting the forgery allegations was already in the petitioner's possession, police investigation was unnecessary and the petitioner could prove the allegations through pre-summoning evidence without requiring custodial interrogation of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 21-May-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 18-May-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  6. 18-May-2026

    Order

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 11-May-2026

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  8. 11-May-2026

    Order

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  9. 13-Mar-2026

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  10. 13-Mar-2026

    Misc. Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  11. 28-Jan-2026

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  12. 28-Jan-2026

    Misc. Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  13. 04-Dec-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  14. 04-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  15. 24-Sep-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  16. 24-Sep-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  17. 23-Jul-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  18. 23-Jul-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  19. 09-Apr-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  20. 09-Apr-2025

    Arguments

  21. 12-Mar-2025

    Arguments

  22. 04-Feb-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  23. 04-Feb-2025

    Arguments

  24. 27-Nov-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  25. 07-Oct-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  26. 07-Oct-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  27. 06-Aug-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  28. 06-Aug-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  29. 04-Jun-2024

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  30. 04-Jun-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  31. 02-Apr-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  32. 02-Apr-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  33. 16-Feb-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  34. 16-Feb-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  35. 16-Feb-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  36. 14-Dec-2023

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  37. 14-Dec-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  38. 12-Dec-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 764/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal District & Sessions Judge dismissed Harihara Ravi Iyer's revision petition challenging the trial court's rejection of his application for FIR registration in a forged Board Resolution case against multiple respondents. The court held that since all evidence supporting the forgery allegations was already in the petitioner's possession, police investigation was unnecessary and the petitioner could prove the allegations through pre-summoning evidence without requiring custodial interrogation of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case