Mohammed Iqbal vs The State, Brahmavara Police Station, Rep by Public Prosecutor, Udupi — 84/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section U/Sec.482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th March 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KAUP010003202026
e-Filing Number
23-02-2026
Filing Number
83/2026
Filing Date
23-Feb-2026
Registration No
84/2026
Registration Date
23-Feb-2026
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, UDUPI
Judge
507-Prl District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 12-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Mohammed Iqbal
Adv. Nagma Tonse
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State, Brahmavara Police Station, Rep by Public Prosecutor, Udupi
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
OrdersView PDF
The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Udupi granted anticipatory bail to Mohammed Iqbal, accused of domestic violence offenses including criminal intimidation and voluntarily causing hurt, holding that the offenses are non-capital and detention would aggravate marital discord. The court imposed stringent conditions including a Rs. 50,000 bail bond, mandatory cooperation with investigation, restrictions on witness tampering, and regular Protection Officer inspections bi-weekly for two months then monthly for three months to safeguard the complainant's security under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
Prl District and Sessions Judge
-
07-Mar-2026
Orders
Prl District and Sessions Judge
-
06-Mar-2026
Orders
Prl District and Sessions Judge
-
04-Mar-2026
Orders
Prl District and Sessions Judge
-
24-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 84/2026
The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Udupi granted anticipatory bail to Mohammed Iqbal, accused of domestic violence offenses including criminal intimidation and voluntarily causing hurt, holding that the offenses are non-capital and detention would aggravate marital discord. The court imposed stringent conditions including a Rs. 50,000 bail bond, mandatory cooperation with investigation, restrictions on witness tampering, and regular Protection Officer inspections bi-weekly for two months then monthly for three months to safeguard the complainant's security under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts