AMRENDRA SINGH vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2022/2026

Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 30th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010074522026

Filing Number

MCRC/3197/2026

Filing Date

18-Feb-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2022/2026

Registration Date

25-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

Other ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

30-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMRENDRA SINGH

    Adv. NEERAJ KUMAR MEHTA,SHASHI BHUSAN TIWARI,SHASHI BHUSAN TIWARI, ,SHASHI BHUSAN TIWARI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected Amrendra Singh's bail application under Sections 317(4) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a cyber fraud case. The court found that despite Singh's claim of innocence, evidence revealed he received Rs. 2,06,786 in proceeds of crime through his bank account after allowing a person to use his QR code, and subsequently withdrew and disbursed these funds—establishing him as a beneficiary of crime. The court deemed it unfit to grant regular bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  5. 27-Feb-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  6. 18-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2022/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected Amrendra Singh's bail application under Sections 317(4) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a cyber fraud case. The court found that despite Singh's claim of innocence, evidence revealed he received Rs. 2,06,786 in proceeds of crime through his bank account after allowing a person to use his QR code, and subsequently withdrew and disbursed these funds—establishing him as a beneficiary of crime. The court deemed it unfit to grant regular bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case