MAYANK PATEL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/1970/2026

Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010075332026

Filing Number

MCRC/3209/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

MCRC/1970/2026

Registration Date

24-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

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MAYANK PATEL

    Adv. Samir Singh,ASHWELL FRANKLIN,ASHWELL FRANKLIN, ,ARVIND PRASAD,ASHWELL FRANKLIN

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Mayank Patel's bail application in a cyber fraud case involving Rs. 7,43,052 defrauded through fake investment schemes. The court found prima facie evidence that Patel actively facilitated the fraud by opening a mule bank account using another person's documents and routing proceeds through it—with 11 separate cyber complaints from across India linked to the account. Given the organized nature of the scheme, large amounts involved, and risk of tampering with evidence, the court deemed bail inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/1970/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Mayank Patel's bail application in a cyber fraud case involving Rs. 7,43,052 defrauded through fake investment schemes. The court found prima facie evidence that Patel actively facilitated the fraud by opening a mule bank account using another person's documents and routing proceeds through it—with 11 separate cyber complaints from across India linked to the account. Given the organized nature of the scheme, large amounts involved, and risk of tampering with evidence, the court deemed bail inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case