RAMESH KUMAR vs STATE — 2273/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 438. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 26th May 2026.

Case disposed

CR CRIMINAL REVISION - CRIMINAL REVISION

CNR: DLSW010110132024

e-Filing Number

13-11-2024

Filing Number

79150/2024

Filing Date

13-Nov-2024

Registration No

2273/2024

Registration Date

13-Nov-2024

Court

District and Session Judge, South-West DWK

Judge

765-Additional Sessions Judge

Decision Date

26-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 18-Jul-2026

FIR Details

Police Station

Dwarka North

Year

0

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 438

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAMESH KUMAR

    Adv. ARJUN MALIK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-May-2026

    Copy Of Order

    Case Summary: Ramesh Kumar v. State (CR 2273/2024) The Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the petitioner's criminal revision challenging a magistrate's rejection of his application for FIR registration under Section 156(3) CrPC. The court held that the dispute—primarily involving non-payment of balance sale consideration under an agreement to sell property—was predominantly civil in nature. The court found the petitioner had adequate remedy through pre-summoning evidence in the complaint case, where he could establish allegations of criminal trespass, forgery, and cheating, and the trial court could summon records from BSES or other authorities if needed during inquiry under Section 202 CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-May-2026

    Disposed

    Additional Sessions Judge

  4. 13-May-2026

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  5. 13-May-2026

    Order

    Additional Sessions Judge

  6. 27-Mar-2026

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  7. 27-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Additional Sessions Judge

  8. 11-Feb-2026

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  9. 11-Feb-2026

    Misc. Arguments

    Additional Sessions Judge

  10. 03-Feb-2026

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  11. 03-Feb-2026

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  12. 28-Jan-2026

    Copy Of Order

  13. 28-Jan-2026

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  14. 22-Dec-2025

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  15. 22-Dec-2025

    Order

    Additional Sessions Judge

  16. 21-Nov-2025

    Copy Of Judicial Proceedings

  17. 21-Nov-2025

    Order

    Additional Sessions Judge

  18. 14-Oct-2025

    Copy Of Order

  19. 14-Oct-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  20. 27-Aug-2025

    Copy Of Order

  21. 27-Aug-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  22. 25-Jul-2025

    Copy Of Order

  23. 25-Jul-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  24. 04-Jun-2025

    Copy Of Order

  25. 04-Jun-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  26. 21-May-2025

    Copy Of Order

  27. 21-May-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  28. 30-Apr-2025

    Copy Of Order

  29. 30-Apr-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  30. 26-Mar-2025

    Copy Of Order

  31. 26-Mar-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  32. 17-Feb-2025

    Copy Of Order

  33. 17-Feb-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  34. 05-Dec-2024

    Copy Of Order

  35. 05-Dec-2024

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  36. 20-Nov-2024

    Copy Of Order

  37. 20-Nov-2024

    Misc. cases/purpose

    Additional Sessions Judge

  38. 14-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  39. 13-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2273/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Ramesh Kumar v. State (CR 2273/2024) The Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the petitioner's criminal revision challenging a magistrate's rejection of his application for FIR registration under Section 156(3) CrPC. The court held that the dispute—primarily involving non-payment of balance sale consideration under an agreement to sell property—was predominantly civil in nature. The court found the petitioner had adequate remedy through pre-summoning evidence in the complaint case, where he could establish allegations of criminal trespass, forgery, and cheating, and the trial court could summon records from BSES or other authorities if needed during inquiry under Section 202 CrPC. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case