SHAMBHU PRASAD SONI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SAKET KUMAR, ,ROHIT KUMAR SINGH,DINESH KUMAR — JHHC10034562025
Next hearing: : -.
CNR: JHHC010034562025
Filing Number
Cr.Rev./2311/2025
Filing Date
30-Jan-2025
Judge
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Coram
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench Type
Single Bench
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHAMBHU PRASAD SONI
Adv. RAJESH KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - SAKET KUMAR, ,ROHIT KUMAR SINGH,DINESH KUMAR
-
2.DURGA PRASAD
Case History
-
—
Next hearingPending
-
04-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon MukhopadhyayView PDF
-
04-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon MukhopadhyayView PDF
Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand rejected petitioner Shambhu Prasad Soni's interlocutory application seeking exemption from surrender. The court found that the petitioner's request for a 4-week adjournment to pursue compromise was merely a delay tactic, noting he had failed to deposit the Rs. 3,00,000 compensation amount as previously directed on 03.03.2025. The application was dismissed, and the petitioner must comply with the trial court's orders. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
26-Jun-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF
-
26-Jun-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
11-Jun-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF
-
11-Jun-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
07-May-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
23-Apr-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
04-Apr-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
28-Mar-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Prasad
-
03-Mar-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay PrasadView PDF
-
19-Feb-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Jan-2025
Case filed
Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand rejected petitioner Shambhu Prasad Soni's interlocutory application seeking exemption from surrender. The court found that the petitioner's request for a 4-week adjournment to pursue compromise was merely a delay tactic, noting he had failed to deposit the Rs. 3,00,000 compensation amount as previously directed on 03.03.2025. The application was dismissed, and the petitioner must comply with the trial court's orders. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts