AAMIR vs SHAKEEB — Crl.A. No. 2822/2026

Case under 1511Rb-criminal Law : Criminal Matters Other Than Covered by the Aforesaid Categories(slps Arising Out of Regular Bail Applications, Suspension of Sentence.) Section I-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010270412026

Filing Date

02-May-2026

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 2822/2026

Diary Number

27041/2026

Order Date

25-May-2026

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Leave Granted & Allowed

Last updated 29-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

1511RB-Criminal Law : Criminal matters other than covered by the aforesaid categories(SLPs arising out of Regular Bail applications, suspension of sentence.) Section I-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AAMIR

    Adv. GAURAV DHINGRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHAKEEB

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-May-2026

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 25-May-2026

    Fresh

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan

  4. 02-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 2822/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Crl.A. No. 002822/2026 (Aamir v. Shakeeb) Outcome: The Supreme Court allowed all three criminal appeals filed by de-facto complainant Aamir, setting aside the High Court's orders that had granted bail to the three convicted murderers (Shakib, Shariq, and Kasif). The Court held that the High Court erred in suspending life sentences pending appeal without strong grounds for acquittal. Case Details: The appellants were convicted of the July 2017 double murder of Arif (a local councilor) and Shadab in Meerut. Evidence showed Shakib and Kasif, then imprisoned for the Saloni Kinner Murder Case, had conspired while in jail to eliminate these prosecution witnesses. The trial court convicted all three with life imprisonment; the High Court wrongly granted bail, citing discrepancies in injury patterns. Next Steps: The three accused must surrender before the Trial Court within one week. The Court advised them to request priority hearing of their pending High Court appeals, noting they have already served over eight years imprisonment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case