Deshbandhu Dhruwa MOHAMMAD AFROZ ATHAR, ,PURNCHAND,Chandradeep Prasad vs State of Chhattisgarh Advocate - A.G. — MCRC/4952/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010211892026

e-Filing Number

22-05-2026

Filing Number

MCRC/8979/2026

Filing Date

23-May-2026

Registration No

MCRC/4952/2026

Registration Date

23-May-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

16-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Deshbandhu Dhruwa MOHAMMAD AFROZ ATHAR, ,PURNCHAND,Chandradeep Prasad

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Chhattisgarh Advocate - A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan AgrawalView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the bail application of Deshbandhu Dhruwa, a 20-year-old arrested for alleged sexual offences against a minor under BNS 2023 and POCSO Act. While the applicant argued he was falsely implicated and the victim turned hostile despite eight months in judicial custody, the court rejected bail considering the serious nature of the offences, the victim's court statement alleging forced physical relations, and pending examination of prosecution witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

  4. 26-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

  5. 26-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 23-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRC/4952/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the bail application of Deshbandhu Dhruwa, a 20-year-old arrested for alleged sexual offences against a minor under BNS 2023 and POCSO Act. While the applicant argued he was falsely implicated and the victim turned hostile despite eight months in judicial custody, the court rejected bail considering the serious nature of the offences, the victim's court statement alleging forced physical relations, and pending examination of prosecution witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case