Allowed¶6

Sohan Lal v. Rakesh Kumar Sharma

Himachal Pradesh HC10 Jul 2026CRMP/2748/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Release of deposited amount from Registry; CrMP No. 2748 of 2026 in Cr.R. No. 151 of 2024; accused's deposit; complainant/applicant; 30% unreleased; judgment dated 30.3.2026; up-to-date interest; remittance to savings bank account; subject to verification; application allowed and disposed of; single judge (Sandeep Sharma).

What did the court decide?

Release of the amount lying deposited with the Registry of this Court, along with up-to-date interest, in favour of the applicant/respondent by remitting the same to his savings bank account detailed in para-3 of the application, subject to verification. ¶6

Sohan Lal Vs Rakesh Kumar Sharma — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the amount lying deposited with the Registry of this Court (30% of the accused's deposit) should be released in favour of the applicant/respondent (complainant).

¶5

Court's answer

The Court found that, pursuant to its judgment dated 30.3.2026 in Cr.R. No. 151 of 2024, the amount deposited before the learned trial Court had already been released in favour of the respondent/complainant, while 30% of the amount lying with the Registry of this Court had not been released for want of directions.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The application is allowed and the Registry is directed to release the amount lying deposited before it, along with up-to-date interest, in favour of the applicant/respondent by remitting the same to his savings bank account detailed in para-3 of the application, subject to verification.

¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal miscellaneous application (CrMP No. 2748 of 2026) filed in Cr.R. No. 151 of 2024 by the respondent/complainant seeking release of the amount deposited with the Registry of the Court. The Court noted that its judgment dated 30.3.2026 in Cr.R. No. 151 of 2024 had directed the learned trial Court to release the amount, if any, deposited before it by the accused on an appropriate application by the complainant; the amount before the trial Court had already been released, while 30% of the deposit lying with the Registry remained unreleased for want of directions. Held: the nonapplicant/petitioner raised no objection; application allowed and the Registry directed to release the deposited amount along with up-to-date interest in favour of the applicant/respondent by remitting it to his savings bank account detailed in para-3 of the application, subject to verification.

Sohan Lal v. Rakesh Kumar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohan Lal v. Rakesh Kumar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajat Lalta @ Golu Vs State of Hp

Rishabh and Another Vs State of Hp and Another

Milan Patel Vs State of Hp

Kamla Bhatia Vs the Jogindera Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

M/S Crystal Pharmaceuticals and Another Vs State of Hp

Mukand Lal Vs Hp State Co-Operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Chirgaon