CHANDRAKANTI vs RAMJI TRIPATHI AND OTHERS — 854/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 173(4). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.
Criminal Misc. Cases
CNR: UPRN010072222025
Filing Number
6834/2025
Filing Date
19-Dec-2025
Registration No
854/2025
Registration Date
24-Dec-2025
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
3-IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge / Spl. Judge(S.C./S.t.)
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 17-Apr-2026
FIR Details
Police Station
CHAUBEPUR
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.CHANDRAKANTI
Adv. Advocate
Respondent(s)
-
1.RAMJI TRIPATHI AND OTHERS
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court allowed the petitioner's application under Section 173(4) BNSS and directed registration of a criminal complaint against Rami Tripathi, Prakash Pandey, and others for allegedly conspiring to misappropriate an e-rickshaw purchased on loan, deceiving the petitioner's husband, and subjecting him to harassment and threats. The court found sufficient grounds to proceed based on the petitioner's detailed knowledge of the accused, incident details, and supporting documentary evidence, citing precedents from the Allahabad High Court and Supreme Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge / Spl. Judge(S.C./S.t.)
-
09-Mar-2026
Hearing
IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge / Spl. Judge(S.C./S.t.)
-
21-Feb-2026
Hearing
IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge / Spl. Judge(S.C./S.t.)
-
14-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 854/2025
The court allowed the petitioner's application under Section 173(4) BNSS and directed registration of a criminal complaint against Rami Tripathi, Prakash Pandey, and others for allegedly conspiring to misappropriate an e-rickshaw purchased on loan, deceiving the petitioner's husband, and subjecting him to harassment and threats. The court found sufficient grounds to proceed based on the petitioner's detailed knowledge of the accused, incident details, and supporting documentary evidence, citing precedents from the Allahabad High Court and Supreme Court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts