Shivam Mines And Minerals Through Its Proprietor Pradeep Aggarwal Vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
.... d without any rhyme or reason, vide order dated 28.12.2020. 5) Stand taken by Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam, however, is that in the Letter of Acceptance it was mentioned that petitioner has to deposit a certain amount as security upto a certain date. However, petitioner failed to deposit that ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Shivam Mines And Minerals Through Its Proprietor Pradeep Aggarwal Vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others
.... ndeep Kothari, learned counsel for Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam, however, submits that Letter of Acceptance was issued to the petitioner on 16.12.2020, and petitioner was required to deposit certain amount as indicated in the Letter of Acceptance; since petitioner could not deposit the amount ment ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Mohan Singh Bisht Vs Managing Director Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd And Others
.... nt dated 23.09.2022 whereby the State Government has directed the respondent-K.M.V.N. not to lease out the property-Tourist Information Centre in favour of private persons any further. Vide order dated 23.09.2024 respondent no.3 has demanded arrears of rent from the petitioner. It is feeling agg ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Sangat Singh @ Sangi Vs State Of Uttarakhand
.... plicant had opened fire, what prevented the Forest Officers to open fire on the applicant? He would submit that, in fact, on the date of incident, the applicant was taking care of his new born baby; since the applicant was earlier involved in some forest cases, he was named in the FIR. 6. L ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Udayveer Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
.... is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., however, from perusal of the F.I.R., it is clear that the petitioner was Driver of the motorcycle on which Ashu and Kaali was sitting who opened fire on respondent no.3-Manish. 3. F.I.R. is lodge ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Ombir Panwar Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
.... entence of 07 years, therefore, he should be dealt with in accordance with the provision of Section 35(3) of the BNSS Act 2023, which is akin to the provision of Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. 4. Learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 have no objecti ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Saurabh Balyan Vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
.... tions in the matter that as to why copy of the order sought by the petitioner is not being provided to him, despite his application filed alongwith a folio. 3. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that the file is missing from the Office of respondent no.4-Tehsildar, Dehradun and ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Divyansh Goswami Vs State Of Uttarakhand
.... 5. Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that this is a case fit for anticipatory bail. 6. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 7. In the eventuality of arrest, the applicant shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to his furnishing a ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Ram Avtar Goyal And Another Vs State Of Uttarakhand
.... rgery. It may have any financial implication, which is not related to the instant case. He would submit that as per objections filed by the State, the Investigating Officer is yet to receive the documents from the bank to ascertain as to whether any forgery was done or not. Therefore, it is argu ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Santosh Kashyap Vs District Magistrate Haridwar & Others
.... 2. After arguing for a considerable period, learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted at bar that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to file fresh with better particulars, if cause of action arises. 3. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is ...
Uttarakhand High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
