SAHEB @ SAHEB ALAM vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL — 330/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Allowed in part on 19th March 2026.

Case disposed

Criminal Misc.

CNR: WBUD010006572026

Filing Number

500/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

330/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

District and Sessions Judge, Raignj, North Dinajpur

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

19-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed in part

Last updated 21-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAHEB @ SAHEB ALAM

    Adv. PRATAP KAR

  2. 2.BHUTTI @ ISRAIL @ MD ISRAIL

  3. 3.ANJANA @ ANJUNA KHATUN

  4. 4.SARMILI @ ISRAT BANU

  5. 5.PARBEEN @ ISHRAT PERVEEN

  6. 6.RUKSAR @ RUKSAR BEGUM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Sessions Judge rejected anticipatory bail for petitioners 1-2 (Saheb Alam and Md Israil) due to direct allegations of assault against them and minor injuries to the victim. However, the court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 3-6 (Anjana Khatun, Israt Banu, Ishrat Parveen, and Ruksar Begum) as no material evidence implicated them, with bail bonds of Rs. 5,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing of Bail Petition/Petition

    District Judge

  6. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 330/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Sessions Judge rejected anticipatory bail for petitioners 1-2 (Saheb Alam and Md Israil) due to direct allegations of assault against them and minor injuries to the victim. However, the court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 3-6 (Anjana Khatun, Israt Banu, Ishrat Parveen, and Ruksar Begum) as no material evidence implicated them, with bail bonds of Rs. 5,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case