SHIVA VERMA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3131/2026
Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 07th May 2026.
CNR: CGHC010119562026
Filing Number
MCRC/5071/2026
Filing Date
23-Mar-2026
Registration No
MCRC/3131/2026
Registration Date
04-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble The Chief Justice
Coram
Hon'ble The Chief Justice
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
Other ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 05-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHIVA VERMA
Adv. REKHRAJ BAGHEL,Bharat Lal Sahu,Bharat Lal Sahu, ,Bharat Lal Sahu
-
2.RAJENDRA SAVRA
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF
Case Summary: MCRC/3131/2026 Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to applicants Shiva Verma and Rajendra Savra, arrested for alleged jewelry shop theft under BNS sections 331(4), 305(a), and 3(5). Key Reasoning: While the applicants faced theft charges, their implication rested primarily on co-accused persons' memorandum statements rather than independent evidence. The court noted no stolen articles were recovered from them. Considering the charge-sheet was filed, only one applicant had prior criminal antecedents (2023, 2025—pending), and the applicants had been incarcerated since January 19, 2026 with trial likely prolonged, the court found bail warranted. Release required personal bond with two sureties each and strict conditions including mandatory court attendance and no adjournment-seeking during witness examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2026
Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF
-
08-Apr-2026
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble The Chief Justice
-
23-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MCRC/3131/2026
Case Summary: MCRC/3131/2026 Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to applicants Shiva Verma and Rajendra Savra, arrested for alleged jewelry shop theft under BNS sections 331(4), 305(a), and 3(5). Key Reasoning: While the applicants faced theft charges, their implication rested primarily on co-accused persons' memorandum statements rather than independent evidence. The court noted no stolen articles were recovered from them. Considering the charge-sheet was filed, only one applicant had prior criminal antecedents (2023, 2025—pending), and the applicants had been incarcerated since January 19, 2026 with trial likely prolonged, the court found bail warranted. Release required personal bond with two sureties each and strict conditions including mandatory court attendance and no adjournment-seeking during witness examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts