VISHAMBHER SINGH NEGI vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C482/230/2021
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) Section 482. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 27th April 2026.
CNR: UKHC010018042021
Filing Number
C482/941/2021
Filing Date
09-02-2021
Registration No
C482/230/2021
Registration Date
09-02-2021
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATIONS ( 5 )
Sub-Category
RELATING TO PROCEEDINGS OF POLICE CHALLANI CASES ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
VISHAMBHER SINGH NEGI
Adv. RAMJI SHRIVASTAVA,SAGAR KOTHARI,SAGAR KOTHARI, ,SAGAR KOTHARI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
NIDHI PUNDIR
Adv. LALIT SHARMA,RAJESH PANDEY DEVIKA TIWARI
POORAN CHANDRA PATHAK
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
AFTER FRESH MATTERS -128
ADMISSION MATTERS -25
ADMISSION MATTERS -25
ADMISSION MATTERS -25
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-02-2021 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
| 10-04-2026 | AFTER FRESH MATTERS -128 |
| 27-03-2026 | ADMISSION MATTERS -25 |
| 25-02-2026 | ADMISSION MATTERS -25 |
| 07-01-2026 | ADMISSION MATTERS -25 |
Orders
The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the petitioner's challenge to orders requiring removal of a gate installed on a 15-foot public pathway. The court upheld findings that the pathway was public property shown in sale-deeds and that blocking it constituted public nuisance under Section 133 CrPC, rejecting arguments that a pending civil suit barred criminal proceedings or that limited usage negated the public nature of the path. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the petitioner's challenge to orders requiring removal of a gate installed on a 15-foot public pathway. The court upheld findings that the pathway was public property shown in sale-deeds and that blocking it constituted public nuisance under Section 133 CrPC, rejecting arguments that a pending civil suit barred criminal proceedings or that limited usage negated the public nature of the path. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts