KATIL AKHATAR ALIAS SIPAHI MIAN AND ORS vs State of Bihar — 512/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 10th March 2026.
Anticipatory Bail
CNR: BREC010014322026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1304/2026
Filing Date
22-01-2026
Registration No
512/2026
Registration Date
27-01-2026
Court
DJ Div. Motihari
Judge
1-Principal District and sessions Judge
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECT
FIR Details
FIR Number
708
Police Station
HARSIDHI
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KATIL AKHATAR ALIAS SIPAHI MIAN AND ORS
Adv. PREM RANJAN PANDEY
Respondent(s)
State of Bihar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District and sessions Judge
Disposed
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 26-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 18-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 07-02-2026 | HEARING | |
| 28-01-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Katil Akhtar @ Sipahi Mian and Maujam Arif, who were accused of murdering Mansaf Ali during a Panchayat election dispute. The court found sufficient incriminating evidence in the case diary, including a co-accused's confession, recovery of the murder weapon, and postmortem findings confirming death by firearm, coupled with the petitioners' prior criminal record. The court also directed police to explain why the petitioners' criminal antecedent was not mentioned in the original case diary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Sessions Judge rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Katil Akhtar @ Sipahi Mian and Maujam Arif, who were accused of murdering Mansaf Ali during a Panchayat election dispute. The court found sufficient incriminating evidence in the case diary, including a co-accused's confession, recovery of the murder weapon, and postmortem findings confirming death by firearm, coupled with the petitioners' prior criminal record. The court also directed police to explain why the petitioners' criminal antecedent was not mentioned in the original case diary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts