DEEPAK KUMAR vs State of West Bengal Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OR APP — 821/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th April 2026.

Case disposed

Criminal Misc.

CNR: WBMD010014652026

Filing Number

1271/2026

Filing Date

16-Feb-2026

Registration No

821/2026

Registration Date

16-Feb-2026

Court

Disrtrict and Sessions Judge, Berhampore Civil

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

16-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 27-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1506

Police Station

RAGHUNATHGANJ

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEEPAK KUMAR

    Adv. SAYAN SINGHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OR APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Sessions Judge, Murshidabad rejected Deepak Kumar's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in a cheating case. The court found that victim statements and case materials showed Kumar received large sums from co-accused Dipankar Mondal (who had cheated the victim), and that Kumar evaded investigation by not appearing despite notice, establishing his direct involvement in the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

  5. 10-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    District Judge

  6. 23-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  7. 23-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District Judge

  8. 27-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

  9. 27-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District Judge

  10. 16-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 16-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 821/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge, Murshidabad rejected Deepak Kumar's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in a cheating case. The court found that victim statements and case materials showed Kumar received large sums from co-accused Dipankar Mondal (who had cheated the victim), and that Kumar evaded investigation by not appearing despite notice, establishing his direct involvement in the offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case