JOGINDER SNGH(Not Applicable) vs SANDEEP HETTA(Not Applicable) — CR.A/112/2014
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 378. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: HPHC010020202014
Filing Number
CR.A/20010/2014
Filing Date
14-Jan-2014
Registration No
CR.A/112/2014
Registration Date
21-Apr-2014
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Bench Type
Single
Category
CRIMINAL APPEAL ( 30 )
Sub-Category
APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL FOR OFFENCES UNDER IPC ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JOGINDER SNGH(Not Applicable)
Adv. Ramesh Chand Sharma,ISHITA BHANDARI,ISHITA BHANDARI, JAGDISH THAKUR ,ISHITA BHANDARI
Respondent(s)
-
1.SANDEEP HETTA(Not Applicable)
Adv. ,Dalip Kumar Sharma 1123
Case History
-
—
Next hearingPending
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
Case Summary: In Criminal Appeal No. 112/2014 (Joginder Singh vs. Sandeep Hetta), heard on 6 May 2026, the court adjourned the matter for two weeks in the interest of justice. The appellant was represented by counsel, while the respondent did not appear. No substantive order on the appeal merits was passed at this hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
Hearing
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
-
22-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
04-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
07-Nov-2025
Additional Registrar(j)View PDF
-
28-Oct-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
28-Oct-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
-
22-Sep-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
22-Sep-2025
Hearing
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla
-
11-Aug-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF
-
18-Jul-2014
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
14-Jan-2014
Case filed
Registration No. CR.A/112/2014
Case Summary: In Criminal Appeal No. 112/2014 (Joginder Singh vs. Sandeep Hetta), heard on 6 May 2026, the court adjourned the matter for two weeks in the interest of justice. The appellant was represented by counsel, while the respondent did not appear. No substantive order on the appeal merits was passed at this hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts