KULDEEP NANDRAJOG vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/1180/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 120B,420,427. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: UKHC010092602026
Next Hearing
: -
Filing Number
C528/4437/2026
Filing Date
29-05-2026
Registration No
C528/1180/2026
Registration Date
29-05-2026
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)
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KULDEEP NANDRAJOG
Adv. SHARANG DHULIA
ANJALI TYAGI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
MRS. MADHU SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-06-2026 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
Case Summary: C528/1180/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned with stay of proceedings granted. The court stayed further criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 645 of 2025) against applicants Kuldeep Nandrajog and Anjali Tyagi pending before the Haridwar Magistrate. The applicants challenged cognizance taken in an FIR regarding non-delivery of a plot in a housing scheme, arguing the dispute is contractual (covered by arbitration clause), no preliminary inquiry was conducted as required by law, and the company has been liquidated since 2018 placing assets under Official Liquidator control. The court issued notice to the complainant returnable at an early date and listed the matter after service report receipt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: C528/1180/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned with stay of proceedings granted. The court stayed further criminal proceedings (Criminal Case No. 645 of 2025) against applicants Kuldeep Nandrajog and Anjali Tyagi pending before the Haridwar Magistrate. The applicants challenged cognizance taken in an FIR regarding non-delivery of a plot in a housing scheme, arguing the dispute is contractual (covered by arbitration clause), no preliminary inquiry was conducted as required by law, and the company has been liquidated since 2018 placing assets under Official Liquidator control. The court issued notice to the complainant returnable at an early date and listed the matter after service report receipt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts