B.L. Krishna Kumari vs Christina Z Chongthu — CC/1618/2026
Case under Contempt of Courts Act Section 10to12. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.
CNR: HBHC010170652026
Filing Number
CC/12371/2026
Filing Date
16-Mar-2026
Registration No
CC/1618/2026
Registration Date
06-Apr-2026
Judge
Nagesh Bheemapaka
Coram
Nagesh Bheemapaka
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CC ( 2 )
Sub-Category
MEDICAL & HEALTH,FAMILY WELFARE ( 55 )
Judicial Branch
OS Section
Last updated 12-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.B.L. Krishna Kumari
Adv. B M PATRO
Respondent(s)
-
1.Christina Z Chongthu
-
2.Gourav Uppal
-
3.P.Madhavi
-
4.Kavitha Kumari
-
5.M. Vasantha Rao
-
6.M. Raja Rao
Case History
-
19-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
19-Jun-2026
For Admission
Nagesh Bheemapaka
-
10-Apr-2026
Nagesh BheemapakaView PDF
-
10-Apr-2026
Nagesh BheemapakaView PDF
Summary: A show-cause notice was issued to six government respondents (including secretaries of Health, Finance, and other officials) directing them to explain why they should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willfully disobeying a court order dated 27.03.2025 in W.P. No. 23001/2017. The respondents must file a counter-affidavit by 19.06.2026 at 10:30 A.M., failing which they will face ex-parte proceedings; non-compliance with the filing deadline will incur a cost of Rs. 10,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CC/1618/2026
Summary: A show-cause notice was issued to six government respondents (including secretaries of Health, Finance, and other officials) directing them to explain why they should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for willfully disobeying a court order dated 27.03.2025 in W.P. No. 23001/2017. The respondents must file a counter-affidavit by 19.06.2026 at 10:30 A.M., failing which they will face ex-parte proceedings; non-compliance with the filing deadline will incur a cost of Rs. 10,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts