State of West Bengal vs Anamul Sk. alias Enamul Sekh alias China Advocate - Md. Nasimul Momin — 674/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 189(2),191(2),191(3),190,109,61(2). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 20th March 2026.

Bail

CNR: WBML010012682026

Case disposed

Filing Number

989/2026

Filing Date

25-02-2026

Registration No

674/2026

Registration Date

25-02-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Malda

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

20th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

FIR Details

FIR Number

1963

Police Station

KALIACHAWK

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 189(2),191(2),191(3),190,109,61(2)
ARMS ACT Section 25(1-B)(a),25/27/35

Petitioner(s)

State of West Bengal

Adv. Asit Baran Basu

Respondent(s)

Anamul Sk. alias Enamul Sekh alias China Advocate - Md. Nasimul Momin

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge

20-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

25-02-2026

Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

Final Orders / Judgements

20-03-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Malda granted anticipatory bail to Anamul Sk (alias Enamul Sekh/China) in a group clash case involving charges under BNS sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 61(2) and Arms Act provisions. The court found no overt act against the petitioner, no major injuries on record, and determined custodial interrogation unnecessary since similar co-accused were already granted anticipatory bail. Bail was set at Rs. 6,000 with two sureties of Rs. 3,000 each, with conditions including bi-weekly meetings with the investigating officer and surrender for regular bail within a fortnight. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

16-03-2026
Copy of Order
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Malda granted anticipatory bail to Anamul Sk (alias Enamul Sekh/China) in a group clash case involving charges under BNS sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109, 61(2) and Arms Act provisions. The court found no overt act against the petitioner, no major injuries on record, and determined custodial interrogation unnecessary since similar co-accused were already granted anticipatory bail. Bail was set at Rs. 6,000 with two sureties of Rs. 3,000 each, with conditions including bi-weekly meetings with the investigating officer and surrender for regular bail within a fortnight. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, Malda All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case