ABHISHEK KUMAR VARDHAN vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/2202/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(1),115(2),333,351(3),352. Disposed: --DISPOSED on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: UKHC010197072025
Filing Number
C528/10179/2025
Filing Date
09-Dec-2025
Registration No
C528/2202/2025
Registration Date
09-Dec-2025
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish Naithani
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
APPLICATIONS ( 5 )
Sub-Category
RELATING TO PROCEEDINGS OF POLICE CHALLANI CASES ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISPOSED
Last updated 02-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.ABHISHEK KUMAR VARDHAN
Adv. DHEERAJ JOSHI
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.RAJENDRA
Adv. ABHISHEK VERMA
-
3.ROOPKISHORE
Adv. ABHISHEK VERMA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
Case Summary The Uttarakhand High Court allowed Abhishek Kumar Vardhan's compounding application and quashed criminal proceedings against him, finding that the dispute was purely personal and amicably settled between the parties. The court reasoned that continuing criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and constitute abuse of process, despite the State's objection that some offences were non-compoundable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Mar-2026
Orders On Applications -22
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Verma
-
29-Dec-2025
Fresh Cases For Admission -3
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Verma
-
11-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Kumar VermaView PDF
-
11-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. C528/2202/2025
Case Summary The Uttarakhand High Court allowed Abhishek Kumar Vardhan's compounding application and quashed criminal proceedings against him, finding that the dispute was purely personal and amicably settled between the parties. The court reasoned that continuing criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and constitute abuse of process, despite the State's objection that some offences were non-compoundable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts