NIRANJAN SHARMA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2884/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010113532026

Filing Number

MCRC/4829/2026

Filing Date

18-Mar-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2884/2026

Registration Date

25-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

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NIRANJAN SHARMA

    Adv. SANJAY AGRAWAL,KRISHNA TANDON,KRISHNA TANDON, ,NEELAM KHAN,VIDHI MATLANI,VIDHI MATLANI,SHRUTI SHRIVASTAVA,SHRUTI SHRIVASTAVA,KRISHNA TANDON

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

    SUMMARY: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the applicant's temporary bail application on 30.03.2026 (filed in connection with charges under BNS Sections 64(2)(m), 115(2), 351(2), and POCSO Act Section 6) due to the victim being a minor, her parents' absence, and her prior court deposition not being provided. However, on 15.04.2026, the same court granted the applicant regular bail of Rs.25,000 with surety, considering the victim's consent and the changed circumstances, while making no observations on the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

  5. 30-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 18-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2884/2026

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the applicant's temporary bail application on 30.03.2026 (filed in connection with charges under BNS Sections 64(2)(m), 115(2), 351(2), and POCSO Act Section 6) due to the victim being a minor, her parents' absence, and her prior court deposition not being provided. However, on 15.04.2026, the same court granted the applicant regular bail of Rs.25,000 with surety, considering the victim's consent and the changed circumstances, while making no observations on the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case