State Gov. vs MUKESH GUPTA — 1889/2025

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 77, 78, 352, 351(3). Status: Appearance. Next hearing: 30th April 2026.

Appearance Next hearing 30-Apr-2026 this date has passed

Sessions Case

CNR: UPGK010071182025

Filing Number

6671/2025

Filing Date

04-Jul-2025

Registration No

1889/2025

Registration Date

31-Jul-2025

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

3-ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)

Last updated 24-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

667

Police Station

Campierganj

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 77, 78, 352, 351(3)
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Section 3(1)D,DH, 3(2)Va
Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 67

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Gov.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MUKESH GUPTA

Case History

  1. 30-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court approved and ratified a settlement agreement (sulhnamah) between the parties dated 13-03-2026, pursuant to the High Court's Criminal Appeal order dated 29-01-2026 which directed settlement and stay of trial proceedings. Both the accused Mukesh and the complainant Sonu Kumar with victim Mamta consented to the settlement terms, which was formally authenticated by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Appearance

    ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Appearance

    ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)

  5. 03-Jan-2026

    Appearance

    ADJ/ Special Judge (Sc/ ST Act)

  6. 15-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 04-Jul-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1889/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court approved and ratified a settlement agreement (sulhnamah) between the parties dated 13-03-2026, pursuant to the High Court's Criminal Appeal order dated 29-01-2026 which directed settlement and stay of trial proceedings. Both the accused Mukesh and the complainant Sonu Kumar with victim Mamta consented to the settlement terms, which was formally authenticated by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case