SADIK vs State of U.P. — 1061/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 303(2),317(2). Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 18th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: UPSP010032462026
Filing Number
2979/2026
Filing Date
12-03-2026
Registration No
1061/2026
Registration Date
12-03-2026
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
1-District Judge
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED
FIR Details
FIR Number
1021
Police Station
DEOBAND
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SADIK
Adv. DGC
Respondent(s)
State of U.P.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge
Disposed
hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | hearing |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 1061/2026 - Sadik v. State of U.P. Court Decision: The bail application of petitioner Sadik has been GRANTED by the Session Court, Saharanpur on 18.03.2026. Key Facts & Reasoning: Sadik was arrested on 11.03.2026 in connection with a theft case (FIR under sections 303(2) and 317(2) IPC, Deobund Police Station) involving alleged theft of four buffalo from a complainant's premises on 17.11.2025. The court considered that this was Sadik's first bail application, no prior bail petitions were pending, and adequate grounds for bail existed based on case circumstances. The accused furnished a personal bond of ₹25,000 and a surety of equal amount. The court imposed standard conditions including mandatory personal appearance at hearings and prohibition from tampering with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 1061/2026 - Sadik v. State of U.P. Court Decision: The bail application of petitioner Sadik has been GRANTED by the Session Court, Saharanpur on 18.03.2026. Key Facts & Reasoning: Sadik was arrested on 11.03.2026 in connection with a theft case (FIR under sections 303(2) and 317(2) IPC, Deobund Police Station) involving alleged theft of four buffalo from a complainant's premises on 17.11.2025. The court considered that this was Sadik's first bail application, no prior bail petitions were pending, and adequate grounds for bail existed based on case circumstances. The accused furnished a personal bond of ₹25,000 and a surety of equal amount. The court imposed standard conditions including mandatory personal appearance at hearings and prohibition from tampering with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts