RAGHUVEER SINGH KALAKOTI vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/933/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 420,120B. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: UKHC010075232026
Filing Number
C528/3580/2026
Filing Date
05-May-2026
Registration No
C528/933/2026
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 POLICE CHALLANI CASES ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAGHUVEER SINGH KALAKOTI
Adv. B D PANDE,H C PATHAK,H C PATHAK, ,SHWETA MEHRA,H C PATHAK
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.NEHA BHATT
Case History
-
—
Next hearingPending
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Case Summary: C528/933/2026 Outcome: The court granted a stay of criminal proceedings. Hon'ble Justice Alok Mahra found the dispute to be civil in nature (involving alleged fraudulent land sale and misuse of power of attorney) that was improperly given criminal color. The court stayed further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 298 of 2025 pending before ACJM Haldwani until the next hearing, while directing notice to respondent Neha Bhatt (returnable in three weeks) and requiring counter-affidavits from respondents. 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. C528/933/2026
Case Summary: C528/933/2026 Outcome: The court granted a stay of criminal proceedings. Hon'ble Justice Alok Mahra found the dispute to be civil in nature (involving alleged fraudulent land sale and misuse of power of attorney) that was improperly given criminal color. The court stayed further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 298 of 2025 pending before ACJM Haldwani until the next hearing, while directing notice to respondent Neha Bhatt (returnable in three weeks) and requiring counter-affidavits from respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts