ADARSH KRISHNA SAHAY vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA — Cr.M.P./4724/2022

Case under An Application U/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 323,498A,504,34,IPC,3,4,DP,ACT. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: JHHC010450632022

Filing Number

Cr.M.P./34909/2022

Filing Date

21-Dec-2022

Registration No

Cr.M.P./4724/2022

Registration Date

25-Dec-2022

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Quashing Matter ( 206 )

Sub-Category

Quashing of Entire Criminal Proceedings ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

An Application U/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 323,498A,504,34,IPC,3,4,DP,ACT

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ADARSH KRISHNA SAHAY

    Adv. ANUSHKA SHARMA,JASVINDAR MAZUMDAR,JASVINDAR MAZUMDAR, ,JAZEB IQBAL,NAVEEN KUMAR,JASVINDAR MAZUMDAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - VINEET KUMAR VASHISTHA

  2. 2.ANURADHA SAHAY

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar ChoudharyView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand adjourned the petition, finding that notice to opposite party no. 2 was not validly served. The court directed the petitioner to file requisites for fresh notice service within four weeks (via speed post and court process), with the petition to be dismissed if this is not completed. The rule is returnable within six weeks, and the case will be relisted upon receipt of the service report. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Oct-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar ChoudharyView PDF

  4. 27-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar ChoudharyView PDF

  5. 24-Jan-2023

    Lawazima

    Registrar (Judicial)

  6. 21-Dec-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. Cr.M.P./4724/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Jharkhand adjourned the petition, finding that notice to opposite party no. 2 was not validly served. The court directed the petitioner to file requisites for fresh notice service within four weeks (via speed post and court process), with the petition to be dismissed if this is not completed. The rule is returnable within six weeks, and the case will be relisted upon receipt of the service report. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case