Latest Uttarakhand Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
The Uttarakhand High Court at Nainital refused bail to a man chargesheeted under POCSO, holding the minor victim's consent legally irrelevant and noting prosecution allegations of concealed religious identity.
A woman sought a writ of mandamus to restore her deleted YouTube channel and remove copyright strikes, but the Uttarakhand High Court held that Article 226 is not available for contractual claims.
Uttarakhand High Court granted bail to an NDPS accused after over two years in custody, holding that the seizure inventory lacked mandatory certification under Rule 8 of the 2022 Rules and no prosecution witness had been examined.
The Uttarakhand High Court reversed an ex parte order against a wife who appeared before the Family Court but was denied time to file her written statement in divorce proceedings.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a challenge to pension commutation recovery, holding a retired officer bore a duty to flag the department's own failure to deduct instalments.
The Uttarakhand High Court directed Kotak Mahindra Bank to unfreeze a customer's account, ruling that no bank has authority to freeze accounts without a competent Magistrate's order.
The High Court of Uttarakhand quashed twelve Section 482 applications challenging complaints under the Food Safety and Standards Act, citing an incompetent laboratory, limitation breach, and defective prosecution sanction.
The Uttarakhand High Court transferred two pending trial cases against eight forest officials of Kalagarh Tiger Reserve Division to the CBI's designated court at Dehradun, after a final charge-sheet was filed there.
A habeas corpus petition over the alleged illegal detention of Prabhat Dhyani by Railway, Rishikesh, and Ramnagar Police prompted sharp questions from the Uttarakhand High Court.
Uttarakhand High Court set aside a culpable-homicide charge under Section 105 BNSS against a driver whose vehicle overturned after a tyre burst, finding no scientific proof of intoxication or rash driving.
A Division Bench of the Uttarakhand High Court confirmed convictions under Sections 302, 326A and 504 IPC against Raghunath Singh, who threw acid on his brother's family in 2018, killing one woman.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the withdrawal of third ACP benefit, holding that service in a statutory local body cannot be reckoned as qualifying service under Finance Department Government Orders.
The High Court of Uttarakhand refused to transfer a Section 302 trial, holding that statutory witness protection under the Uttarakhand Witness Protection Act, 2020 was the proper remedy.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a gram panchayat Pradhan's challenge to her disqualification, finding her 1996 Transfer Certificate could not have named a State that did not exist until 2000.
Justice Alok Mahra directs Haridwar police to assess threat and protect a married couple, relying on Lata Singh v State of U.P. after a counsellor's report backed the wife's stand.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed an appeal against a Family Court order restoring a wife's cross-examination opportunity, holding that res judicata principles do not apply rigidly to interlocutory procedural orders.
A Division Bench dismissed quo warranto petitions challenging the Vice Chancellor's appointment at Uttarakhand Ayurved University, holding that service as Principal qualifies as teaching experience under UGC Regulations 2018.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a challenge to a UPCL service bye-law that allows absorbed UPPCL employees to seek promotion after five years while direct recruits must wait ten.
The Division Bench held that because the District Assistant Registrar exercised statutory powers under the Uttarakhand Co-operative Societies Act to direct termination, the writ petition was maintainable and wrongly dismissed.
The Uttarakhand High Court dismissed a revision against a trial court's refusal to compel an indigent plaintiff to deposit court fee mid-trial, holding the defendants had skipped the mandatory first step.
The Uttarakhand High Court partly allowed a Section 482 CrPC petition, holding that summoning under Section 354A IPC and Sections 11/12 POCSO was unsustainable where the complainant's own recorded statements lacked the required ingredients.
The Uttarakhand High Court set aside an award against the Power Corporation, holding that liability under the Employees Compensation Act can only be fastened on the actual employer of the deceased.
Health Workers appointed after 2013 cannot claim Grade Pay of Rs. 2800 given to pre-2013 colleagues under a court judgment, the Uttarakhand High Court has held.
Uttarakhand High Court dismisses quashing petitions filed by an absconding accused and his daughters in a cheating case involving Patanjali Ayurveda and Divya Pharmacy, holding the power of attorney route impermissible.
