AMOL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/2948/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 13th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010122482026

Filing Number

MCRC/5204/2026

Filing Date

24-Mar-2026

Registration No

MCRC/2948/2026

Registration Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

Other ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

13-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 29-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMOL

    Adv. KHILENDRA SAHU,RAJENDRA PATEL,RAJENDRA PATEL, ,RAJENDRA PATEL,RAJENDRA PATEL

  2. 2.Vinayak More

  3. 3.Amit More

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

    Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected the bail application of three applicants (Amol, Vinayak More, and Amit More) accused of running an organized online cheating syndicate across India. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of their involvement in defrauding victims through QR code-based payment scams, noting the seizure of multiple bank passbooks, ATM cards, mobile phones, and laptops from their possession, and considering that a co-accused's bail had already been rejected on similar grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

  4. 01-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

  5. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/2948/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected the bail application of three applicants (Amol, Vinayak More, and Amit More) accused of running an organized online cheating syndicate across India. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of their involvement in defrauding victims through QR code-based payment scams, noting the seizure of multiple bank passbooks, ATM cards, mobile phones, and laptops from their possession, and considering that a co-accused's bail had already been rejected on similar grounds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case