SANDEEP vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/383/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 498-A,494. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: UKHC010137432024

Filing Number

C528/7349/2024

Filing Date

02-Sep-2024

Registration No

C528/383/2024

Registration Date

02-Sep-2024

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 26-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) Section 498-A,494
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Act No. 43 of 2005) Section 3/4

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANDEEP

    Adv. SIDDHARTH BANKOTI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.

  2. 2.SMT. DURGESH KASHYAP ALIAS UPASANA KASHYAP

    Adv. PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok MahraView PDF

    Case Summary: C528/383/2024 Outcome: The court issued notice to respondent no.2 (Durgesh Kashyap alias Upasana Kashyap) returnable at an early date. The petitioner Sandeep was permitted to serve the respondent through normal service, Dasti notice, and all permissible modes including electronic service. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 03-Oct-2024

    Admission Matters (After Fresh) -30

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Maithani

  4. 12-Sep-2024

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra MaithaniView PDF

  5. 12-Sep-2024

    Fresh Cases For Admission -3

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal

  6. 03-Sep-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 02-Sep-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. C528/383/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C528/383/2024 Outcome: The court issued notice to respondent no.2 (Durgesh Kashyap alias Upasana Kashyap) returnable at an early date. The petitioner Sandeep was permitted to serve the respondent through normal service, Dasti notice, and all permissible modes including electronic service. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case