SONAL VAISH vs State of UP — 34/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 11th March 2026.

Case disposed

Criminal Revision - Criminal Revision Cases

CNR: UPBN010011162026

Filing Number

1071/2026

Filing Date

11-Feb-2026

Registration No

34/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

2-A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

Decision Date

11-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 22-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SONAL VAISH

    Adv. AMIT SAXENA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of UP

  2. 2.SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR VAISH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The High Court accepted the criminal revision petition and set aside the lower court's order dated 02.01.2026 passed under Sections 164-165 BNS, 2023. The court found the lower court's order arbitrary and procedurally defective as it failed to provide both parties opportunity to present evidence, skipped mandatory procedural requirements, and did not determine who had unlawfully cultivated the disputed agricultural land before seizing it. The court remanded the case for fresh adjudication with proper compliance of legal procedure and fair hearing to both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Order/Disposal

    A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Final Argu.

    A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    A.d.and S.j., Court No.-1, Budaun

  8. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 11-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 34/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The High Court accepted the criminal revision petition and set aside the lower court's order dated 02.01.2026 passed under Sections 164-165 BNS, 2023. The court found the lower court's order arbitrary and procedurally defective as it failed to provide both parties opportunity to present evidence, skipped mandatory procedural requirements, and did not determine who had unlawfully cultivated the disputed agricultural land before seizing it. The court remanded the case for fresh adjudication with proper compliance of legal procedure and fair hearing to both parties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case