AATMA RAM SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3349/2026

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010135122026

Filing Number

MCRC/5697/2026

Filing Date

02-Apr-2026

Registration No

MCRC/3349/2026

Registration Date

09-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

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AATMA RAM SAHU

    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. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Summary of MCRC/3349/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to Aatma Ram Sahu in five consolidated fraud cases involving allegations of collecting over ₹3.2 crore from multiple complainants under the pretense of share trading investments with promised returns, which were never returned. The court approved bail with stringent conditions including personal bond with two sureties, mandatory court attendance, no adjournment requests during witness examination, and penalty for bail violation, considering that co-accused persons were already granted bail and the applicant had been in custody since September 2025 with trial expected to be lengthy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 13-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/3349/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of MCRC/3349/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to Aatma Ram Sahu in five consolidated fraud cases involving allegations of collecting over ₹3.2 crore from multiple complainants under the pretense of share trading investments with promised returns, which were never returned. The court approved bail with stringent conditions including personal bond with two sureties, mandatory court attendance, no adjournment requests during witness examination, and penalty for bail violation, considering that co-accused persons were already granted bail and the applicant had been in custody since September 2025 with trial expected to be lengthy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case