MANOHAR SINGH PARASTE vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/4194/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010178272026

Filing Number

MCRC/7552/2026

Filing Date

30-Apr-2026

Registration No

MCRC/4194/2026

Registration Date

02-May-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--REJECTED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MANOHAR SINGH PARASTE

    Adv. Pritam Singh,KISHORE NARAYAN,KISHORE NARAYAN, ,VIKAS UPADHYAY,VIKAS UPADHYAY,KISHORE NARAYAN

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

    Case Summary: MCRC/4194/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected bail for Manohar Singh Paraste, accused of rape under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed the victim falsely implicated him due to a wage dispute and that they were in a consensual relationship, but the court found these arguments contradictory to his own bail application and disregarded them. Considering the serious nature of the rape allegation, medical evidence showing abrasion on the victim's chest, the victim's consistent statement, and that the chargesheet was already filed, the court deemed it unfit to grant regular bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 30-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/4194/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MCRC/4194/2026 The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected bail for Manohar Singh Paraste, accused of rape under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant claimed the victim falsely implicated him due to a wage dispute and that they were in a consensual relationship, but the court found these arguments contradictory to his own bail application and disregarded them. Considering the serious nature of the rape allegation, medical evidence showing abrasion on the victim's chest, the victim's consistent statement, and that the chargesheet was already filed, the court deemed it unfit to grant regular bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case