SHEIKH OSAMA vs State of Bihar — 528/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 18th March 2026.

Case disposed

Regular Bail

CNR: BREC010036852026

Filing Number

3420/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

528/2026

Registration Date

24-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Motihari

Judge

1-Principal District and sessions Judge

Decision Date

18-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 07-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

430

Police Station

MOTIHARI MUFFASSIL

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHEIKH OSAMA

    Adv. MUKESH PRASAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Order By Court

    Court Decision Summary The Sessions Court of East Champaran granted bail to Sheikh Osama, accused of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and criminal intimidation involving approximately ₹5.19 lakh in a land transaction dispute. The court found that the accused had no prior criminal record, had already benefited from Section 35(3) protection during investigation, and had been in custody since February 17, 2026. Bail was granted on a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, conditioned on the accused's cooperation in the trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and sessions Judge

  6. 25-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 528/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Sessions Court of East Champaran granted bail to Sheikh Osama, accused of criminal breach of trust, cheating, and criminal intimidation involving approximately ₹5.19 lakh in a land transaction dispute. The court found that the accused had no prior criminal record, had already benefited from Section 35(3) protection during investigation, and had been in custody since February 17, 2026. Bail was granted on a bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties of equal amount, conditioned on the accused's cooperation in the trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case