RAJENDRA KASHYAP vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A. — C528/2203/2025
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 109(2),115,351(3),352. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: UKHC010197092025
Filing Number
C528/10180/2025
Filing Date
09-Dec-2025
Registration No
C528/2203/2025
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
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 02-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAJENDRA KASHYAP
Adv. ABHISHEK VERMA
-
2.ROOP KISHORE
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Advocate - G.A.
-
2.ABHISHEK KUMAR VARDHAN
Adv. DHEERAJ JOSHI
-
3.SHIBBU
Adv. DHEERAJ JOSHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashish NaithaniView PDF
The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the compounding application and quashed all criminal proceedings against applicants Rajendra Kashyap and another under Criminal Case No. 567 of 2025, after finding that the parties amicably settled their personal dispute. The court held that continuation of proceedings would serve no useful purpose and amount to abuse of process, despite the state's opposition citing non-compoundable offences. 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. C528/2203/2025
The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the compounding application and quashed all criminal proceedings against applicants Rajendra Kashyap and another under Criminal Case No. 567 of 2025, after finding that the parties amicably settled their personal dispute. The court held that continuation of proceedings would serve no useful purpose and amount to abuse of process, despite the state's opposition citing non-compoundable offences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts