JAVED MALIK vs TALAL JAMAL AND ORS — 117/2025

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 97. Disposed: Contested--REMANDED BACK on 30th March 2026.

Cr Rev - CRIMINAL REVISION

CNR: DLNE010034902025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

19-11-2025

Filing Number

1853/2025

Filing Date

20-11-2025

Registration No

117/2025

Registration Date

20-11-2025

Court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD

Judge

5-ASJ/SPECIAL.JUDGE(NDPS)

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REMANDED BACK

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 97

Petitioner(s)

JAVED MALIK

Adv. Subhash Chandra Lochakia

Respondent(s)

TALAL JAMAL AND ORS

IRFAN

Hearing History

Judge: 5-ASJ/SPECIAL.JUDGE(NDPS)

30-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Arguments

17-02-2026

Arguments

02-02-2026

Misc. cases

13-01-2026

Misc. cases

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
30-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER

Case 117/2025 Summary: Javed Malik alleged he purchased a stolen Creta car from respondents Talat Jamal and others, and filed a complaint under BNSS sections 223/175(3) seeking FIR registration. The trial court disposed of his complaint on grounds that jurisdiction lay in East District rather than North-East District. The Additional Sessions Judge set aside this dismissal order, finding the trial court erred by disposing of the complaint without examining merits, and noting the investigating officer admitted North-East District jurisdiction was established. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

20-11-2025
COPY OF ORDER
24-11-2025
COPY OF ORDER
19-12-2025
COPY OF ORDER
13-01-2026
COPY OF ORDER
02-02-2026
COPY OF ORDER
17-02-2026
COPY OF ORDER
16-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

Case 117/2025 Summary: Javed Malik alleged he purchased a stolen Creta car from respondents Talat Jamal and others, and filed a complaint under BNSS sections 223/175(3) seeking FIR registration. The trial court disposed of his complaint on grounds that jurisdiction lay in East District rather than North-East District. The Additional Sessions Judge set aside this dismissal order, finding the trial court erred by disposing of the complaint without examining merits, and noting the investigating officer admitted North-East District jurisdiction was established. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case