ARJUN SINGH AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — WPCRL/1079/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010100552026
Filing Number
WPCRL/4803/2026
Filing Date
08-Jun-2026
Registration No
WPCRL/1079/2026
Registration Date
08-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )
Sub-Category
MISC MATTERS ( 11 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ARJUN SINGH AND ORS
Adv. MANISHA BHANDARI,PRITISH ARYA,PRITISH ARYA, ,SAURABH KUMAR PANDEY,SHASHWAT SIDHANT,PRITISH ARYA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS
Adv. G.A.
-
3.SUPERINTENDENT
Adv. G.A.
Case History
-
17-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
17-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah
-
10-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani,Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha SahView PDF
Case Summary: WPCRL/1079/2026 The petition by Arjun Singh and others challenging denial of premature release was heard on 10.06.2026. The petitioners, being eligible convicts under the State's premature release policy, contended their cases were not recommended for premature release without justification. The Court adjourned the matter to 17.06.2026, directing the State Counsel to provide a categorical statement explaining the grounds for denying premature release recommendation despite the petitioners falling under the government's own policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Jun-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPCRL/1079/2026
Case Summary: WPCRL/1079/2026 The petition by Arjun Singh and others challenging denial of premature release was heard on 10.06.2026. The petitioners, being eligible convicts under the State's premature release policy, contended their cases were not recommended for premature release without justification. The Court adjourned the matter to 17.06.2026, directing the State Counsel to provide a categorical statement explaining the grounds for denying premature release recommendation despite the petitioners falling under the government's own policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts