SHIVAM SHARMA @ GOPI KRISHNA vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G., SURAJ KUMAR AUDHELIYA (FOR RES. NO. — CRMP/1201/2026
Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 04th May 2026.
CNR: CGHC010156162026
Filing Number
CRMP/6588/2026
Filing Date
16-Apr-2026
Registration No
CRMP/1201/2026
Registration Date
25-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Coram
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
APPLICATION U/S 528 OF B.N.S.S. 2023 ( 1411 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 05-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHIVAM SHARMA @ GOPI KRISHNA
Adv. Mrs. SHITAL SONI,VIJYITA SAHU,VIJYITA SAHU, ,Ankit Kumar Shrivas,Ankit Kumar Shrivas,VIJYITA SAHU
-
2.Vineet Singh @ Shomya Raj @ Vishal Singh
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G., SURAJ KUMAR AUDHELIYA (FOR RES. NO.
-
2.Hemant Modi
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF
Case Summary: CRMP 1201/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court declined to quash an FIR involving Rs. 30 lakh allegedly paid for securing college admission through improper means, despite the parties reaching a settlement whereby Rs. 24 lakh was refunded. The court held that while a compromise existed, the allegations involved broader public interest implications regarding institutional fairness and potentially unlawful conduct that warranted investigation rather than immediate dismissal. The court directed the investigating officer to examine the matter considering the settlement and file an appropriate closure report accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
29-Apr-2026
For Orders [On Office Notes]
Additional Registrar(j)
-
16-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRMP/1201/2026
Case Summary: CRMP 1201/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court declined to quash an FIR involving Rs. 30 lakh allegedly paid for securing college admission through improper means, despite the parties reaching a settlement whereby Rs. 24 lakh was refunded. The court held that while a compromise existed, the allegations involved broader public interest implications regarding institutional fairness and potentially unlawful conduct that warranted investigation rather than immediate dismissal. The court directed the investigating officer to examine the matter considering the settlement and file an appropriate closure report accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts