ICICI Bank Ltd. vs SAMITA MAITY AND ORS — 56/2026

Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act Section 14. Disposed: Uncontested--Withdrawn on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Misc Crl Case - Misc Criminal Case

CNR: WBHW040004272026

Filing Number

427/2026

Filing Date

28-Jan-2026

Registration No

56/2026

Registration Date

28-Jan-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah

Judge

1-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Withdrawn

Last updated 02-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act Section 14

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ICICI Bank Ltd.

    Adv. SANJUKTA ROY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SAMITA MAITY AND ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    Final OrderView PDF

    The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Howrah permitted the petitioner bank to withdraw its criminal case after the respondents paid the overdue amount during the proceedings, removing it from Non-Performing Asset (NPA) status. The court disposed of the case with liberty for the bank to file afresh if needed, holding that it should not impede a willing withdrawal by the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 19-Feb-2026

    General OrdersView PDF

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    Hearing of Petition

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  6. 28-Jan-2026

    General OrdersView PDF

  7. 28-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 28-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 56/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Howrah permitted the petitioner bank to withdraw its criminal case after the respondents paid the overdue amount during the proceedings, removing it from Non-Performing Asset (NPA) status. The court disposed of the case with liberty for the bank to file afresh if needed, holding that it should not impede a willing withdrawal by the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case