STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs SK MAIDUL ALIAS SK VULON AND 6 ORS Advocate - SANGLAP MUKHERJEE — 304/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 09th March 2026.
1.Criminal Misc. - Criminal Misc.
CNR: WBHW010007532026
Filing Number
467/2026
Filing Date
09-Feb-2026
Registration No
304/2026
Registration Date
09-Feb-2026
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Howrah
Judge
1-District Judge
Decision Date
09-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 20-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
07
Police Station
AMTA
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Adv. SOMNATH BANERJEE
Respondent(s)
-
1.SK MAIDUL ALIAS SK VULON AND 6 ORS Advocate - SANGLAP MUKHERJEE
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Mar-2026
Final OrderView PDF
The Howrah Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to seven accused persons in a case involving allegations of minor disputes over standing in line, finding that the facts had been exaggerated and the accusations lacked genuine merit. The court applied Supreme Court precedents requiring careful evaluation of the charges and balancing the need to prevent unjustified detention against investigative concerns. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bonds of Rs. 5,000 with sureties and conditions including availability for police interrogation and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge
-
25-Feb-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
25-Feb-2026
Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition
District Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
17-Feb-2026
Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition
District Judge
-
09-Feb-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
09-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 304/2026
The Howrah Sessions Court granted anticipatory bail to seven accused persons in a case involving allegations of minor disputes over standing in line, finding that the facts had been exaggerated and the accusations lacked genuine merit. The court applied Supreme Court precedents requiring careful evaluation of the charges and balancing the need to prevent unjustified detention against investigative concerns. Bail was granted subject to furnishing bonds of Rs. 5,000 with sureties and conditions including availability for police interrogation and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts