Shakir Ullah Khan vs State — 189/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 340(2),336(3),338,318(4),61(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 06th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPET010004502026

Filing Number

392/2026

Filing Date

02-Feb-2026

Registration No

189/2026

Registration Date

02-Feb-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District And Sessions Judge

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 16-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 340(2),336(3),338,318(4),61(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shakir Ullah Khan

    Adv. Priya Dixit

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Court Summary The Sessions Court at Etah granted anticipatory bail to Shakir Ulla Khan in case No. 05/2026 under IPC Sections 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4), and 61(2), finding that he was merely a witness to a deed execution rather than a conspirator in the alleged fraudulent land transfer scheme. The court applied the legal principles established in *Gurubakas Singh v. State of Punjab* and *Siddharam Satyalingappa v. Maharashtra*, holding that the accused had no criminal history, no independent knowledge of the fraud, and posed no risk to witnesses or trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District And Sessions Judge

  4. 21-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District And Sessions Judge

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 189/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Summary The Sessions Court at Etah granted anticipatory bail to Shakir Ulla Khan in case No. 05/2026 under IPC Sections 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4), and 61(2), finding that he was merely a witness to a deed execution rather than a conspirator in the alleged fraudulent land transfer scheme. The court applied the legal principles established in *Gurubakas Singh v. State of Punjab* and *Siddharam Satyalingappa v. Maharashtra*, holding that the accused had no criminal history, no independent knowledge of the fraud, and posed no risk to witnesses or trial proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case