SHEIKH RAHMAN QURESHI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2256/2026
Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 01st April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010090802026
Filing Number
MCRC/3871/2026
Filing Date
28-Feb-2026
Registration No
MCRC/2256/2026
Registration Date
03-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
POCSO Act ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 29-Apr-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHEIKH RAHMAN QURESHI
Adv. RAHIL ARUN KOCHAR,VAIBHAV MITTAL,VAIBHAV MITTAL, ,RENU KOCHAR,LEEKESH KUMAR,LEEKESH KUMAR,AVISHEK BHARTI,VAIBHAV MITTAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar VermaView PDF
The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Sheikh Rahman Qureshi's second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 in a case involving charges under Sections 74, 75, 296, 115(2) of BNS and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The court found no substantial change in circumstances since dismissing his first bail application on 15.01.2025 and therefore declined to reconsider the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar VermaView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
-
28-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MCRC/2256/2026
The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected Sheikh Rahman Qureshi's second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 in a case involving charges under Sections 74, 75, 296, 115(2) of BNS and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The court found no substantial change in circumstances since dismissing his first bail application on 15.01.2025 and therefore declined to reconsider the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts