KU. RANI ALIAS THAGESHWARI VERMA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3265/2026
Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010125022026
Filing Number
MCRC/5315/2026
Filing Date
25-Mar-2026
Registration No
MCRC/3265/2026
Registration Date
08-Apr-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
Other ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
16-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 26-May-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KU. RANI ALIAS THAGESHWARI VERMA
Adv. ASHISH GANGWANI,MADHUNISHA SINGH,MADHUNISHA SINGH, ,ANANT SINGH CHANDEL,ADITI JOSHI,SAJAL KUMAR GUPTA,PANKAJ SINGH,MADHUNISHA SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF
Case Summary: MCRC 3265/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the second bail application of Ku. Rani Alias Thageshwari Verma, accused in a murder case involving a violent group assault on January 3, 2025, that resulted in the death of the complainant's father. The court found the prosecution evidence sufficient and noted that the 5-month expedited trial period previously ordered remained unexpired, thus denying bail without commenting on the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Apr-2026
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
-
10-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF
-
10-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MCRC/3265/2026
Case Summary: MCRC 3265/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the second bail application of Ku. Rani Alias Thageshwari Verma, accused in a murder case involving a violent group assault on January 3, 2025, that resulted in the death of the complainant's father. The court found the prosecution evidence sufficient and noted that the 5-month expedited trial period previously ordered remained unexpired, thus denying bail without commenting on the merits of the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts