MAFUJ SK vs State of West Bengal Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OR APP — 1166/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 25th March 2026.
Criminal Misc.
CNR: WBMD010021022026
Filing Number
1812/2026
Filing Date
09-Mar-2026
Registration No
1166/2026
Registration Date
09-Mar-2026
Court
Disrtrict and Sessions Judge, Berhampore Civil
Judge
1-District Judge
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 06-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
78
Police Station
HARIHARPARA
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MAFUJ SK
Adv. Rahul Sk
Respondent(s)
-
1.State of West Bengal Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OR APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Murshidabad rejected the bail application filed by Mafuj Sk under Section 483 of BNSS in a case involving charges under Sections 85/92 of BNS. The accused, who is the husband of the alleged victim, was charged with assaulting the victim by kicking her abdomen, resulting in termination of her 8-month pregnancy. After reviewing witness statements, the victim's statement, and medical documents on record, the court found the nature of allegations and available materials established the accused's involvement in the alleged offense, making it unfit to grant bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge
-
24-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
-
24-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
-
13-Mar-2026
Hearing
District Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 1166/2026
Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Murshidabad rejected the bail application filed by Mafuj Sk under Section 483 of BNSS in a case involving charges under Sections 85/92 of BNS. The accused, who is the husband of the alleged victim, was charged with assaulting the victim by kicking her abdomen, resulting in termination of her 8-month pregnancy. After reviewing witness statements, the victim's statement, and medical documents on record, the court found the nature of allegations and available materials established the accused's involvement in the alleged offense, making it unfit to grant bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts