STATE OF WEST BENGAL vs MUKTAR AHMED ALIAS MUKHTAR AHAMED Advocate - RABI PRASAD SHAW — 395/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th March 2026.
1.Criminal Misc. - Criminal Misc.
CNR: WBHW010010242026
Filing Number
613/2026
Filing Date
20-Feb-2026
Registration No
395/2026
Registration Date
20-Feb-2026
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Howrah
Judge
1-District Judge
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 03-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
34
Police Station
SHIBPUR
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Adv. SOMNATH BANERJEE
Respondent(s)
-
1.MUKTAR AHMED ALIAS MUKHTAR AHAMED Advocate - RABI PRASAD SHAW
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Final OrderView PDF
Summary: The Howrah Sessions Court granted bail to Muktar Ahmed, accused of sexual offence under BNS sections 69/115(2)/79/351(2)/3(5), finding the relationship was consensual despite a broken marriage promise. The court emphasized that prolonged custody during investigation should not serve as punishment and noted the victim's refusal of medical examination, her education level, and the consensual nature of their multi-year relationship supported bail, releasing him on Rs. 10,000 bond with conditions prohibiting contact with the victim. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge
-
06-Mar-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
06-Mar-2026
Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition
District Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
27-Feb-2026
Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition
District Judge
-
20-Feb-2026
General OrdersView PDF
-
20-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 395/2026
Summary: The Howrah Sessions Court granted bail to Muktar Ahmed, accused of sexual offence under BNS sections 69/115(2)/79/351(2)/3(5), finding the relationship was consensual despite a broken marriage promise. The court emphasized that prolonged custody during investigation should not serve as punishment and noted the victim's refusal of medical examination, her education level, and the consensual nature of their multi-year relationship supported bail, releasing him on Rs. 10,000 bond with conditions prohibiting contact with the victim. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts