SHARON YAMIN AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND — C528/950/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 120B,384,419,420,506,468,471. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 19th May 2026.
CNR: UKHC010076252026
Filing Number
C528/3642/2026
Filing Date
07-May-2026
Registration No
C528/950/2026
Registration Date
07-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)
Decision Date
19-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 29-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHARON YAMIN AND ORS
Adv. RAJAT MITTAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
-
2.SUKRANT CHAUDHARY
Adv. RAMJI SHRIVASTAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the compounding application and quashed Criminal Case No. 7979 of 2024 following an amicable settlement between the estranged spouses. The parties reached a compromise whereby respondent no. 2 agreed to pay ₹25 lakh permanent alimony to applicant no. 1, and both mutually consented to dissolve their marriage under Section 27 of the Uniform Civil Code. The court held that where conviction is remote due to settlement between parties, criminal proceedings should be quashed to avoid prejudice to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
19-May-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
-
11-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
-
11-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. C528/950/2026
The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the compounding application and quashed Criminal Case No. 7979 of 2024 following an amicable settlement between the estranged spouses. The parties reached a compromise whereby respondent no. 2 agreed to pay ₹25 lakh permanent alimony to applicant no. 1, and both mutually consented to dissolve their marriage under Section 27 of the Uniform Civil Code. The court held that where conviction is remote due to settlement between parties, criminal proceedings should be quashed to avoid prejudice to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts