MUNENDRA DHRUV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/3399/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010144832026

Filing Number

MCRC/6126/2026

Filing Date

08-Apr-2026

Registration No

MCRC/3399/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

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--DISMISSED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUNENDRA DHRUV

    Adv. Lukesh Kumar Mishra,Vinay Nagdev,Vinay Nagdev, ,MANOJ KUMAR YADAV,GIRISH SAHU,AKASH MISHRA,Vinay Nagdev

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan AgrawalView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the regular bail application of Munendra Dhruv, arrested under POCSO Act and BNS provisions for allegedly luring a 13-year-old victim under pretext of marriage and committing sexual abuse. The court declined bail after considering the serious nature of the offense, the victim's objection (raised through video conferencing), and the victim's testimony, without finding merit in the applicant's defense of consensual relationship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

  5. 15-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 08-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/3399/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the regular bail application of Munendra Dhruv, arrested under POCSO Act and BNS provisions for allegedly luring a 13-year-old victim under pretext of marriage and committing sexual abuse. The court declined bail after considering the serious nature of the offense, the victim's objection (raised through video conferencing), and the victim's testimony, without finding merit in the applicant's defense of consensual relationship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case