State of West Bengal vs Zakee Sorif alias Jakir Sarif Advocate - Md. Sakir Hossain — 741/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 316(2),318(4),316(5),338,336(3). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 13th April 2026.

Case disposed

Bail

CNR: WBML010013772026

Filing Number

1075/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

741/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Malda

Judge

1-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

13-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 04-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

456

Police Station

PUKURIA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 316(2),318(4),316(5),338,336(3)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of West Bengal

    Adv. Asit Baran Basu

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Zakee Sorif alias Jakir Sarif Advocate - Md. Sakir Hossain

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The Sessions Judge rejected Zakee Sorif's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in connection with criminal breach of trust and misappropriation charges. The court found serious allegations of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of considerable money, determining that custodial interrogation was necessary for investigation purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  5. 24-Mar-2026

    Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

    District and Sessions Judge

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

  7. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 741/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected Zakee Sorif's anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS in connection with criminal breach of trust and misappropriation charges. The court found serious allegations of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of considerable money, determining that custodial interrogation was necessary for investigation purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case