RAHUL KUMAR GUPTA vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - MANOJ KR MISHRA — JHHC10158022025

Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: JHHC010158022025

Filing Number

Cr.Rev./10574/2025

Filing Date

08-May-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. 1.RAHUL KUMAR GUPTA

    Adv. RAJESH KUMAR,MAYANK DEEP,MAYANK DEEP, ,AMIT KUMAR,SHWETA SUMAN,MAYANK DEEP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - MANOJ KR MISHRA

  2. 2.RINKY DEVI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr.justice Rongon MukhopadhyayView PDF

    Summary In Criminal Revision Filing No. 10574 of 2025, the Jharkhand High Court granted petitioner Rahul Kumar Gupta's application for exemption from surrender before the trial court. The court found that Gupta, an acid attack victim with facial disfigurement and grievous injuries confirmed by medical evidence, warranted exemption under Rule 159 of the Jharkhand High Court Rules. The main criminal revision petition was admitted with notice issued to opposite party Rinky Devi, requiring her response by 12.06.2026, and trial court records were called for. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar DwivediView PDF

  4. 09-Jul-2025

    Lawazima

    Registrar (Judicial)

  5. 08-May-2025

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In Criminal Revision Filing No. 10574 of 2025, the Jharkhand High Court granted petitioner Rahul Kumar Gupta's application for exemption from surrender before the trial court. The court found that Gupta, an acid attack victim with facial disfigurement and grievous injuries confirmed by medical evidence, warranted exemption under Rule 159 of the Jharkhand High Court Rules. The main criminal revision petition was admitted with notice issued to opposite party Rinky Devi, requiring her response by 12.06.2026, and trial court records were called for. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case