KULDEEP NANDRAJOG vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/1183/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 120B,420. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: UKHC010092652026
Filing Number
C528/4442/2026
Filing Date
29-May-2026
Registration No
C528/1183/2026
Registration Date
29-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 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KULDEEP NANDRAJOG
Adv. SHARANG DHULIA
-
2.ANJALI TYAGI
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.MR. RAJENDRA KUMAR PADAVANDA
Case History
-
—
Next hearingPending
-
01-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Case Summary: C528/1183/2026 The court issued notice to respondent no.2 and stayed further criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.620 of 2025 pending before the Haridwar Magistrate. The case involves a property dispute arising from a housing scheme where the complainant invested in a plot but did not receive possession or a sale deed. The applicants contend the matter is contractual (governed by an arbitration clause), that no preliminary inquiry was conducted before FIR registration (violating Supreme Court guidelines), and that the company has been liquidated since 2018, removing their control. The matter is adjourned for service report and counter affidavit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
-
29-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. C528/1183/2026
Case Summary: C528/1183/2026 The court issued notice to respondent no.2 and stayed further criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.620 of 2025 pending before the Haridwar Magistrate. The case involves a property dispute arising from a housing scheme where the complainant invested in a plot but did not receive possession or a sale deed. The applicants contend the matter is contractual (governed by an arbitration clause), that no preliminary inquiry was conducted before FIR registration (violating Supreme Court guidelines), and that the company has been liquidated since 2018, removing their control. The matter is adjourned for service report and counter affidavit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts