SABU KO vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRCA/776/2026

Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010200782026

Filing Number

MCRCA/8520/2026

Filing Date

13-May-2026

Registration No

MCRCA/776/2026

Registration Date

14-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

16-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SABU KO

    Adv. ASHUTOSH PANDEY,A.V.SHRIDHAR,A.V.SHRIDHAR, ,A.V.SHRIDHAR,A.V.SHRIDHAR,A.V.SHRIDHAR

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Case Summary: MCRCA 776/2026 Court Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sabu Ko in a fraud case involving alleged dishonoured cheques and non-supply of electronic goods by Q-Three Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The court found that since co-accused Karthik Shivan and Anup P. Padmanabhan had already been granted bail in identical circumstances, the applicant was entitled to bail on grounds of parity, despite being merely a shareholder rather than a director. Conditions: Bail was granted subject to personal bond with surety, with conditions including non-interference with witnesses, regular court appearance, and submission of identification documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 13-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRCA/776/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MCRCA 776/2026 Court Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted anticipatory bail to Sabu Ko in a fraud case involving alleged dishonoured cheques and non-supply of electronic goods by Q-Three Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The court found that since co-accused Karthik Shivan and Anup P. Padmanabhan had already been granted bail in identical circumstances, the applicant was entitled to bail on grounds of parity, despite being merely a shareholder rather than a director. Conditions: Bail was granted subject to personal bond with surety, with conditions including non-interference with witnesses, regular court appearance, and submission of identification documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case