AKANSHA GANGWAR vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — WPCRL/808/2026

Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: UKHC010073282026

Filing Number

WPCRL/3484/2026

Filing Date

04-May-2026

Registration No

WPCRL/808/2026

Registration Date

04-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

CRIMINAL WRIT FOR PROTECTION ( 6 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AKANSHA GANGWAR

    Adv. D N SHARMA,J P PANDEY,J P PANDEY, ,MANJU BAHUGUNA,J P PANDEY

  2. 2.JAGDISH

Respondent(s)

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

  2. 2.SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

    Adv. G.A.

  3. 3.STATION HOUSE OFFICER

    Adv. G.A.

  4. 4.GAJENDRA GANGWAR ALIAS GAJENDRA PAL

  5. 5.DEVENDRA GANGWAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh ThapliyalView PDF

    WPCRL 808/2026 Summary The court granted protection to two major petitioners, Akansha Gangwar and Jagdish, who lawfully married and registered their marriage. Finding no dispute regarding their age and valid marriage, the court directed the SSP to assess any threat perception and take appropriate protective steps, and ordered the SHO to advise the father and cousin (respondents) against taking law into their own hands. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  4. 04-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPCRL/808/2026

casestatus.in Summary

WPCRL 808/2026 Summary The court granted protection to two major petitioners, Akansha Gangwar and Jagdish, who lawfully married and registered their marriage. Finding no dispute regarding their age and valid marriage, the court directed the SSP to assess any threat perception and take appropriate protective steps, and ordered the SHO to advise the father and cousin (respondents) against taking law into their own hands. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case