GIRRAJ vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT HOME SECRETARY — Crl.A. No. 776/2013
Case under 1511Li-criminal Law : Criminal Matters Other Than Covered by the Aforesaid Categories(cases Where Life Sentence Is Imposed) Section II-E. Status: Sclsc Pending.
CNR: SCIN010213892012
Filing Date
31-Dec-2012
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 776/2013
Diary Number
21389/2012
Order Date
24-Apr-2025
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Last updated 07-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GIRRAJ
Adv. T. N. SINGH[P-1]
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH HOME DEPARTMENT HOME SECRETARY
Adv. YASHRAJ SINGH BUNDELA [R-1]
Case History
-
24-Apr-2025
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Apr-2025
Fixed Date by Court
Registrar
-
04-Mar-2025
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Mar-2025
Fixed Date by Court
Registrar
-
30-Jan-2025
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Jan-2025
Fixed Date by Court
Registrar
-
21-Jan-2025
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Jan-2025
Fixed Date by Court
Registrar
-
20-Nov-2024
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Nov-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Apr-2016
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Dec-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Dec-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Oct-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Oct-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
28-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
15-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
11-Apr-2014
Office ReportView PDF
-
11-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
07-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
04-Apr-2014
ROPView PDF
-
28-Feb-2014
ROPView PDF
-
09-Dec-2013
ROPView PDF
-
22-Nov-2013
ROPView PDF
-
23-Sep-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-May-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-May-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
02-Apr-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Feb-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Dec-2012
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 776/2013
-
07-Dec-2012
ROPView PDF
-
15-Oct-2012
ROPView PDF
-
10-Sep-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Apr-2012
ROPView PDF
Summary On 24-04-2025, Crl.A. No. 776/2013 (Girraj v. The State of Madhya Pradesh) was heard before the Registrar. Both parties were duly represented. The Court directed the Registry to email soft copies of High Court and Trial Court records to counsel and process the matter for listing before the bench as per rules. The respondent was given time to file a counter affidavit if needed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts