Uttarakhand High Court
BA2/346/2023 of RASHID Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND on 12 February 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 39 BA2 No.346 of 2023 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Vivek Pathak, Advocate holding brief of Mr. K.R. Gazi, Advocate for the applicant. Ms.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 39
BA2 No.346 of 2023 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.
Mr. Vivek Pathak, Advocate holding brief of Mr. K.R. Gazi, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Manisha Rana Singh, D.A.G. for the State. At the very outset, learned State Counsel submits that the bail application has rendered infructuous because the trial has already been concluded and the applicant has been acquitted. The bail application is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
(Ravindra Maithani J.)
12.02.2026 RV