KAPIL GARG R S SAMMAL, SARITA BISHT vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C482/833/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 406,420,504. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010068172024

Filing Number

C482/3722/2024

Filing Date

08-May-2024

Registration No

C482/833/2024

Registration Date

08-May-2024

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

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 23-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 406,420,504

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAPIL GARG R S SAMMAL, SARITA BISHT

  2. 2.SHALINI GARG

Respondent(s)

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

  2. 2.ROHIT HURIA

    Adv. LALIT SHARMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF

    The court quashed the entire criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1669 of 2023, as the parties had entered into a binding settlement whereby the applicants paid ₹38,61,795 to respondent no. 2, which was duly accepted. The court rejected respondent no. 2's subsequent claim for unpaid interest, holding that once parties voluntarily compromise and act upon it with full payment, the respondent cannot raise additional claims outside the settlement terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Nov-2025

    Orders On Applications -22

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  4. 09-Oct-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  5. 09-Oct-2025

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  6. 19-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  7. 19-Sep-2025

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  8. 10-Sep-2025

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani

  9. 27-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF

  10. 27-Aug-2025

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  11. 18-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

  12. 18-Aug-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  13. 07-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

  14. 07-Aug-2025

    Admission Matters -25

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Purohit

  15. 07-Jul-2025

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj PurohitView PDF

  16. 12-Aug-2024

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  17. 20-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  18. 20-Jul-2024

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  19. 19-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  20. 19-Jul-2024

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  21. 09-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  22. 09-Jul-2024

    Personal Appearance -4

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  23. 18-Jun-2024

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  24. 10-May-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  25. 10-May-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

  26. 10-May-2024

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  27. 09-May-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 08-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. C482/833/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The court quashed the entire criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1669 of 2023, as the parties had entered into a binding settlement whereby the applicants paid ₹38,61,795 to respondent no. 2, which was duly accepted. The court rejected respondent no. 2's subsequent claim for unpaid interest, holding that once parties voluntarily compromise and act upon it with full payment, the respondent cannot raise additional claims outside the settlement terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case