Deepak Sharma(Not Applicable) vs RAJENDER PRASHAD (DECEASED) THROUGH LRs.(Not Applicable) — CRMP/3587/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 147. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HPHC010475642025

Filing Number

CRMP/7266/2025

Filing Date

02-Aug-2025

Registration No

CRMP/3587/2025

Registration Date

19-Aug-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Last updated 02-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 147

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Deepak Sharma(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Sanjay Kumar Sharma

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAJENDER PRASHAD (DECEASED) THROUGH LRs.(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Next hearingPending

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF

    In Cr.MP No. 3587/2025, the court noted that the matter had been compromised between petitioner Deepak Sharma and respondent Rajinder Prashad. The court directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti Shimla, following precedent guidelines. The case was adjourned for listing after completion of the deposit requirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Orders

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla

  4. 23-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF

  5. 26-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh KainthlaView PDF

  6. 26-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRMP/3587/2025

casestatus.in Summary

In Cr.MP No. 3587/2025, the court noted that the matter had been compromised between petitioner Deepak Sharma and respondent Rajinder Prashad. The court directed the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount with the H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Kasumpti Shimla, following precedent guidelines. The case was adjourned for listing after completion of the deposit requirement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case