Khusbuu Khatoon vs Md. Saddam — 128/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2), 115(2), 103(1), 74, 79, 352, 351(2), 3(5). Disposed: Uncontested--AMALGATE WITH ORIGINAL RECORD on 30th April 2026.

Case disposed

SESSION CASE

CNR: BRSH010020122026

Filing Number

1949/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

128/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

DJ Div. Saharsa

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

30-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--AMALGATE WITH ORIGINAL RECORD

Last updated 28-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

441

Police Station

SAURBAZAR

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2), 115(2), 103(1), 74, 79, 352, 351(2), 3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Khusbuu Khatoon

    Adv. Krishna Murari Prasad

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Md. Saddam

  2. 2.Md. Samsul

  3. 3.Md. Ainil

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    Copy of orderView PDF

    The Principal Sessions Judge at Saharsa found that two separate records relating to the same case (S.T. Case No. 128/2026) were pending before the court. The court ordered the amalgamation of the supplementary record with the original record (S.T. No. 97/2026) to avoid multiplicity and maintain proper judicial records, directing the office to tag and consolidate them for future reference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 04-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 25-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 128/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal Sessions Judge at Saharsa found that two separate records relating to the same case (S.T. Case No. 128/2026) were pending before the court. The court ordered the amalgamation of the supplementary record with the original record (S.T. No. 97/2026) to avoid multiplicity and maintain proper judicial records, directing the office to tag and consolidate them for future reference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case