PAWAN SHARMA vs KAMLESH PATHAK . — Crl.A. No. 1335/2009

Case under Section II-E. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010069202005

Filing Date

29-Mar-2005

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 1335/2009

Diary Number

6920/2005

Order Date

16-Apr-2014

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section II-E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PAWAN SHARMA

    Adv. KAILASH CHAND (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KAMLESH PATHAK .

    Adv. ABHIJIT SENGUPTA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 31-Jul-2013

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 01-Oct-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 08-Aug-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 24-Jul-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 02-Apr-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 13-Jan-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 25-Nov-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 22-Oct-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 28-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 28-Jul-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 15-May-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 23-Apr-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 22-Feb-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 18-Jan-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 04-Jan-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 04-Jan-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 26-Oct-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 10-Sep-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 05-Jan-2006

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  22. 21-Apr-2005

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  23. 29-Mar-2005

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 1335/2009

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Crl.A. No. 001335/2009 (Pawan Sharma v. Kamlesh Pathak) On 16 April 2014, the Supreme Court dismissed Pawan Sharma's appeal as not pressed. Sharma had appealed against a December 2004 High Court (Madhya Pradesh) order that quashed an FIR he had filed; the Court found the appeal had become infructuous following a Magistrate's order on 30 December 2010. Appellant's counsel stated he had no instructions to proceed, leading the Court to dismiss without adjudicating merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case