MONA BARVE vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3300/2026

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 30th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010141402026

Filing Number

MCRC/5967/2026

Filing Date

07-Apr-2026

Registration No

MCRC/3300/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

POCSO Act ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

30-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 17-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MONA BARVE

    Adv. B.P.SINGH,VIDYA BHUSHAN SONI,VIDYA BHUSHAN SONI, ,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh,ROSHAN SINGH LAMBA,ADITYA SRIVASTAV,ADITYA SRIVASTAV,VIDYA BHUSHAN SONI

  2. 2.Ravi Barve

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to Mona Barve and Ravi Barve, who were accused of illegal adoption and forging documents related to a child born to a 15-year-old minor girl. The court found their role limited to adoption and considered that co-accused persons received similar relief, the victim raised no objection to bail, and the trial would take considerable time. The applicants were released on personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions including mandatory court attendance and undertakings not to seek adjournments during evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/3300/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court granted bail to Mona Barve and Ravi Barve, who were accused of illegal adoption and forging documents related to a child born to a 15-year-old minor girl. The court found their role limited to adoption and considered that co-accused persons received similar relief, the victim raised no objection to bail, and the trial would take considerable time. The applicants were released on personal bond with two sureties each, subject to conditions including mandatory court attendance and undertakings not to seek adjournments during evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case