ANKUR CHAUHAN NIVESSH BAHUGUNA, DEVENDRA KR.MISHRA, ,C S GAUTAM,VIKRAMADITYA SHAH,SACHIN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF U.K. DEHRADUN Advocate - G.A. — C482/21/2023
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) Section 156(3). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010002402023
Filing Number
C482/121/2023
Filing Date
05-Jan-2023
Registration No
C482/21/2023
Registration Date
05-Jan-2023
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATIONS ( 5 )
Sub-Category
RELATING TO PROCEEDINGS OF OTHER COMPLAINT CASE ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ANKUR CHAUHAN NIVESSH BAHUGUNA, DEVENDRA KR.MISHRA, ,C S GAUTAM,VIKRAMADITYA SHAH,SACHIN
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF U.K. DEHRADUN Advocate - G.A.
-
2.KAVITA
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
3.KAMAL
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
4.MADHUSHUDAN
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
5.PAWAN
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
6.UDYAPAL
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
7.BRIJPAL
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
-
8.RAKHI
Adv. S.S.YADAV, S.P.SHARMA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Case Summary: C482/21/2023 The court allowed the criminal miscellaneous application and set aside orders from the lower courts that had dismissed the applicant's Section 156(3) CrPC application seeking FIR registration. The court found merit in the applicant's argument that the Magistrate rejected the application without proper consideration despite prima facie cognizable offence being disclosed. The matter was remanded to the trial court with directions to reconsider the application in accordance with Supreme Court precedent requiring FIR registration when a complaint discloses cognizable offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
31-Dec-2025
For Final Hearing -40
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
-
10-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
-
21-Nov-2025
For Final Hearing -40
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
-
28-Oct-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
-
28-Oct-2025
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
-
18-Sep-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
-
02-Sep-2025
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
-
17-Jul-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF
-
17-Jul-2025
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
-
02-Jun-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF
-
02-Jun-2025
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
-
02-May-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF
-
02-May-2025
For Final Hearing -40
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit
-
10-Mar-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF
-
07-Jan-2025
Orders On Applications (After Fresh) -23
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma
-
23-Oct-2024
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Bharti SharmaView PDF
-
21-Sep-2024
Admission Matters -25
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal
-
26-Sep-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar SharmaView PDF
-
26-Sep-2023
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma
-
06-Jul-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar SharmaView PDF
-
13-Jun-2023
Orders On Applications (After Fresh) -23
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma
-
12-Jun-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar SharmaView PDF
-
17-Apr-2023
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma
-
06-Jan-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar SharmaView PDF
-
06-Jan-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Jan-2023
Case filed
Registration No. C482/21/2023
Case Summary: C482/21/2023 The court allowed the criminal miscellaneous application and set aside orders from the lower courts that had dismissed the applicant's Section 156(3) CrPC application seeking FIR registration. The court found merit in the applicant's argument that the Magistrate rejected the application without proper consideration despite prima facie cognizable offence being disclosed. The matter was remanded to the trial court with directions to reconsider the application in accordance with Supreme Court precedent requiring FIR registration when a complaint discloses cognizable offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts