SARVAN SINGH AND ANR vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/921/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 125,351(2),352. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010074412026
Filing Number
C528/3540/2026
Filing Date
05-05-2026
Registration No
C528/921/2026
Registration Date
05-05-2026
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
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SARVAN SINGH AND ANR
Adv. S R S GILL,MILIND RAJ,MILIND RAJ, ,MILIND RAJ
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
HEERA SINGH
Adv. KUNDAN SINGH,NAVEEN SINGH MER
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
The High Court quashed the criminal charge-sheet and proceedings against Sarvan Singh and another for alleged abusive behavior, threats, and firing a licensed firearm on February 15, 2025. Finding the dispute personal in nature with no actual injuries, no person sustained injuries, and parties having voluntarily settled their dispute, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings, holding continuance would amount to abuse of process. However, the court reserved its opinion on administrative proceedings regarding the firearm licence, leaving that to the District Magistrate's independent decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court quashed the criminal charge-sheet and proceedings against Sarvan Singh and another for alleged abusive behavior, threats, and firing a licensed firearm on February 15, 2025. Finding the dispute personal in nature with no actual injuries, no person sustained injuries, and parties having voluntarily settled their dispute, the court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings, holding continuance would amount to abuse of process. However, the court reserved its opinion on administrative proceedings regarding the firearm licence, leaving that to the District Magistrate's independent decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts