SAURABH DAS AND ORS vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — WPCRL/1130/2026
Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 323,498A,504. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 17th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010105112026
Filing Number
WPCRL/5026/2026
Filing Date
15-Jun-2026
Registration No
WPCRL/1130/2026
Registration Date
15-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )
Sub-Category
FIR QUASHING ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
17-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SAURABH DAS AND ORS
Adv. NALIN SAUN
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.STATION HOUSE OFFICER
Adv. G.A.
-
3.SMT. AVINASH KAUR DAS
Adv. NAITIK BHATT,KIRTI GROVER MITALI ARORA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF
Case Summary: WPCRL/1130/2026 The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed FIR/Case Crime No. 335 of 2025 (Sections 323, 498-A, 504 IPC) registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehradun. The court found that the parties had amicably settled their dispute, with the complainant (Smt. Avinash Kaur Das) now living happily with the petitioners and both parties requesting closure. Applying Supreme Court guidelines, the court held that continuing criminal proceedings would constitute abuse of process and injustice, as conviction prospects were remote given the compromise, and allowing the parties to live peacefully served the ends of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
-
15-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPCRL/1130/2026
Case Summary: WPCRL/1130/2026 The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed FIR/Case Crime No. 335 of 2025 (Sections 323, 498-A, 504 IPC) registered at Police Station Kotwali Dehradun. The court found that the parties had amicably settled their dispute, with the complainant (Smt. Avinash Kaur Das) now living happily with the petitioners and both parties requesting closure. Applying Supreme Court guidelines, the court held that continuing criminal proceedings would constitute abuse of process and injustice, as conviction prospects were remote given the compromise, and allowing the parties to live peacefully served the ends of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts