SANDEEP vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — CRLR/248/2026

Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 363. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 23rd April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010055972026

Filing Number

CRLR/2628/2026

Filing Date

08-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRLR/248/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

REVISIONS ( 4 )

Sub-Category

U/S 401 CODE OF CR.P.C.{CASES IN WHICH NOTICE TO ENHANCE SENTENCE/CONVICTION ISSUED(DB)} ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

23-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 17-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 363

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANDEEP

    Adv. ASHISH KUMAR JEMINI,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI, ,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

    The High Court allowed the criminal revision and quashed the appellate court's rejection of bail. The court found the lower appellate judge failed to properly examine the conviction's merits and incorrectly interpreted Section 430(1) of BNSS 2023 as directory rather than mandatory. Since the accused maintained bail throughout trial without misuse and faced only seven years imprisonment, the court suspended his conviction and sentence pending appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Apr-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  4. 18-Apr-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  5. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  6. 10-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 08-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLR/248/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court allowed the criminal revision and quashed the appellate court's rejection of bail. The court found the lower appellate judge failed to properly examine the conviction's merits and incorrectly interpreted Section 430(1) of BNSS 2023 as directory rather than mandatory. Since the accused maintained bail throughout trial without misuse and faced only seven years imprisonment, the court suspended his conviction and sentence pending appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case