Kamil Akhtar Siddique Hasan vs State Thr. Chavani Police Stn Malegaon — 251/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 10th March 2026.
Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application
CNR: MHNS070006322026
e-Filing Number
04-03-2026
Filing Number
446/2026
Filing Date
04-03-2026
Registration No
251/2026
Registration Date
04-03-2026
Court
District Court-1 ,Malegaon
Judge
5-District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge, Malegoan
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
FIR Details
FIR Number
43
Police Station
MALEGAON CHAWANI POLICE STATION
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kamil Akhtar Siddique Hasan
Adv. WASIF FAIZ AHMAD ATIK AHMAD
Heena Kausar Majid Akhtar
Adv. WASIF FAIZ AHMAD ATIK AHMAD
Respondent(s)
State Thr. Chavani Police Stn Malegaon
Hearing History
Judge: 5-District Judge-4 and Additional Sessions Judge, Malegoan
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Notice_Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 07-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 04-03-2026 | Notice_Unready |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court allowed the bail application of the accused, finding that the dispute was fundamentally civil in nature involving a revoked power of attorney and property transaction, with no prima facie evidence of criminal deception. The accused were granted bail on personal and surety bonds of Rs. 25,000 each, on condition they cooperate with the investigation, as the court determined custodial interrogation was unwarranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court allowed the bail application of the accused, finding that the dispute was fundamentally civil in nature involving a revoked power of attorney and property transaction, with no prima facie evidence of criminal deception. The accused were granted bail on personal and surety bonds of Rs. 25,000 each, on condition they cooperate with the investigation, as the court determined custodial interrogation was unwarranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts