BIRAM AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/929/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 147,148,149,323,452,504,506. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010075162026
Filing Number
C528/3575/2026
Filing Date
05-May-2026
Registration No
C528/929/2026
Registration Date
05-May-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 OTHER COMPLAINT CASE ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BIRAM AND ORS
Adv. BHARAT SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.JITENDRA
Adv. R P SINGH
-
3.RAFAL SINGH
Adv. R P SINGH
-
4.RESHAMA DEVI
Adv. R P SINGH
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Case Summary: C528/929/2026 The court allowed the compounding application and quashed Criminal Case No. 877 of 2025 against Biram and others after the parties reached an amicable settlement. Judge Alok Mahra held that under Supreme Court precedent, non-compoundable offences (Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC) can be compounded with court permission when compromise renders conviction remote, and continuing proceedings would cause prejudice to the accused. The FIR and chargesheet were accordingly quashed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-May-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
-
05-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. C528/929/2026
Case Summary: C528/929/2026 The court allowed the compounding application and quashed Criminal Case No. 877 of 2025 against Biram and others after the parties reached an amicable settlement. Judge Alok Mahra held that under Supreme Court precedent, non-compoundable offences (Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC) can be compounded with court permission when compromise renders conviction remote, and continuing proceedings would cause prejudice to the accused. The FIR and chargesheet were accordingly quashed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts