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: : -.
CNR: UKHC010137432024
Next Hearing
: -
Filing Number
C528/7349/2024
Filing Date
02-09-2024
Registration No
C528/383/2024
Registration Date
02-09-2024
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)
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SANDEEP
Adv. SIDDHARTH BANKOTI
Respondent(s)
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
SMT. DURGESH KASHYAP ALIAS UPASANA KASHYAP
Adv. PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Mahra
FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236
ADMISSION MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -30
FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 03-09-2024 | FRESH CASES AS DEFECTIVE -236 |
| 03-10-2024 | ADMISSION MATTERS (AFTER FRESH) -30 |
| 12-09-2024 | FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3 |
Orders
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.
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.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts