JAGROOP SINGH AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/707/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 504,506,354,307. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 17th April 2026.
CNR: UKHC010059632026
Filing Number
C528/2829/2026
Filing Date
15-04-2026
Registration No
C528/707/2026
Registration Date
15-04-2026
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 POLICE CHALLANI CASES ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
17th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JAGROOP SINGH AND ORS
Adv. S R S GILL,MILIND RAJ,MILIND RAJ, ,MILIND RAJ
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
ANOOP SINGH
Adv. KUNDAN SINGH
JOGA SINGH
Adv. KUNDAN SINGH
MANPREET KAUR ALIAS MUNNAT
Adv. KUNDAN SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
Case Summary: C528/707/2026 The court allowed Jagroop Singh and others' compounding application and quashed all criminal proceedings (Sessions Trial No.207 of 2023) against them, finding that the parties had amicably settled their dispute. The applicants were accused of firing a gunshot at Joga Singh, causing injury near his forehead, but the defense contended no firearm was discharged and only simple injuries resulted from a scuffle, supported by medical evidence. Following Supreme Court precedent permitting quashing of proceedings where compromise renders conviction remote, the court held that continuing prosecution would cause prejudice to the accused and allowed the offences to be compounded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: C528/707/2026 The court allowed Jagroop Singh and others' compounding application and quashed all criminal proceedings (Sessions Trial No.207 of 2023) against them, finding that the parties had amicably settled their dispute. The applicants were accused of firing a gunshot at Joga Singh, causing injury near his forehead, but the defense contended no firearm was discharged and only simple injuries resulted from a scuffle, supported by medical evidence. Following Supreme Court precedent permitting quashing of proceedings where compromise renders conviction remote, the court held that continuing prosecution would cause prejudice to the accused and allowed the offences to be compounded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts