State of West Bengal vs Taimur Sai alias Md. Taimur Ali Sai and 05 ors. Advocate - Swarup Hader — 675/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),121(2),132,3(5). Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail

CNR: WBML010012692026

Filing Number

990/2026

Filing Date

25-Feb-2026

Registration No

675/2026

Registration Date

25-Feb-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Malda

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

91

Police Station

MANIKCHAWK

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),121(2),132,3(5)
The West Bengal Gambling and Prize Competitions Act, 1957 Section 10

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal

    Adv. Asit Baran Basu

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Taimur Sai alias Md. Taimur Ali Sai and 05 ors. Advocate - Swarup Hader

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Malda granted anticipatory bail to six petitioners accused of obstructing police during a gambling raid (Manikchak P.S. Case No. 91/2026). The court found that the injuries sustained were simple, three co-accused had already been enlarged on bail, and custodial interrogation was unwarranted given the nature of allegations. The petitioners were released on Rs. 8,000 bail each with sureties, directed to meet the investigating officer twice weekly until charge-sheet submission, and must surrender for regular bail within a fortnight. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 25-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 25-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 675/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Sessions Judge, Malda granted anticipatory bail to six petitioners accused of obstructing police during a gambling raid (Manikchak P.S. Case No. 91/2026). The court found that the injuries sustained were simple, three co-accused had already been enlarged on bail, and custodial interrogation was unwarranted given the nature of allegations. The petitioners were released on Rs. 8,000 bail each with sureties, directed to meet the investigating officer twice weekly until charge-sheet submission, and must surrender for regular bail within a fortnight. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case