ROHIT MARKAM vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2270/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010085692026

Filing Number

MCRC/3657/2026

Filing Date

26-Feb-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2270/2026

Registration Date

07-Mar-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

30-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ROHIT MARKAM

    Adv. VEER VERMA,ANKUSH BORKAR,ANKUSH BORKAR, ,ANKUSH BORKAR

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Rohit Markam's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed in connection with a liquor seizure case under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. The court found that the applicant is a habitual offender with four previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act (two still pending), had misused earlier bail, and 5.4 bulk liters of liquor was recovered from his possession, making it an unfit case for bail. 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. 11-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2270/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Rohit Markam's bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed in connection with a liquor seizure case under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. The court found that the applicant is a habitual offender with four previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act (two still pending), had misused earlier bail, and 5.4 bulk liters of liquor was recovered from his possession, making it an unfit case for bail. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case