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.
CNR: UKHC010055972026
Filing Number
CRLR/2628/2026
Filing Date
08-04-2026
Registration No
CRLR/248/2026
Registration Date
08-04-2026
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
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SANDEEP
Adv. ASHISH KUMAR JEMINI,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI, ,VINOD KUMAR JEMINI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
| 23-04-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
| 18-04-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts