SAGAR SAHU @ KARAN SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2380/2026

Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 25th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010097722026

Filing Number

MCRC/4182/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2380/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

POCSO Act ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

25-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAGAR SAHU @ KARAN SAHU

    Adv. ANIL KUMAR GULATI,GUNJA TARAM,GUNJA TARAM, ,I.BHAWANI,SHUBHAM TIWARI,SHUBHAM TIWARI,GUNJA TARAM

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 25-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the bail application of Sagar Sahu, accused of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 14-year-old minor girl under the pretext of marriage. The court found the nature and gravity of offenses under BNS Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(M), 65(1), and POCSO Act Section 6 to be serious enough to deny bail. However, the trial court was directed to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2380/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the bail application of Sagar Sahu, accused of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 14-year-old minor girl under the pretext of marriage. The court found the nature and gravity of offenses under BNS Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(M), 65(1), and POCSO Act Section 6 to be serious enough to deny bail. However, the trial court was directed to expedite proceedings and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case