CHIMANARAM vs HARLAL SINGH — 50/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 448. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Misc. Cases - CR. MISC

CNR: RJCH010002942026

Filing Number

249/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

50/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

DJ ADJ DISTRICT HQ CHURU

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 448

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHIMANARAM

    Adv. Surendra Jakhar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HARLAL SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Summary of Case 50/2026 - Chimanaram v. Harlal Singh The Sessions Court at Churu rejected petitioner Chimanaram's plea to transfer criminal case FIR No. 1473/2019 (CIS No. 828/2023) against respondent Harlal Singh to another court. The court found that petitioner's allegations of judicial bias against the presiding officer were unfounded and fabricated, noting that the trial court had made adequate efforts to secure witness attendance including multiple summons, arrest warrants, and special prosecutor involvement. The court upheld the trial court's proceedings as legally sound and without irregularity, dismissing the transfer petition as lacking merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 50/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 50/2026 - Chimanaram v. Harlal Singh The Sessions Court at Churu rejected petitioner Chimanaram's plea to transfer criminal case FIR No. 1473/2019 (CIS No. 828/2023) against respondent Harlal Singh to another court. The court found that petitioner's allegations of judicial bias against the presiding officer were unfounded and fabricated, noting that the trial court had made adequate efforts to secure witness attendance including multiple summons, arrest warrants, and special prosecutor involvement. The court upheld the trial court's proceedings as legally sound and without irregularity, dismissing the transfer petition as lacking merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case