BADAL BHARDWAJ vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2087/2026

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010083062026

Filing Number

MCRC/3554/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2087/2026

Registration Date

26-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

EXCISE Act ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 17-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BADAL BHARDWAJ

    Adv. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava,PALLAVI SINGH,PALLAVI SINGH, ,VINAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA,VINAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA,Sharad Mishra,KHILENDRA SAHU,KHILENDRA SAHU

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to Badal Bhardwaj, arrested for possessing 40 liters of illicit mahua liquor under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. The court found that despite the serious charges, the applicant had no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet was already filed, and prolonged detention pending trial was unjustified. Bail was conditional on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and strict compliance with court attendance and non-adjournment requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 02-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2087/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to Badal Bhardwaj, arrested for possessing 40 liters of illicit mahua liquor under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. The court found that despite the serious charges, the applicant had no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet was already filed, and prolonged detention pending trial was unjustified. Bail was conditional on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and strict compliance with court attendance and non-adjournment requirements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case