DEVESH TIWARI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRCA/879/2026

Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 18th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010224712026

Filing Number

MCRCA/9625/2026

Filing Date

11-Jun-2026

Registration No

MCRCA/879/2026

Registration Date

15-Jun-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

18-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEVESH TIWARI

    Adv. GURUDEV I.SHARAN

Respondent(s)

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

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief JusticeView PDF

    Case Summary: MCRCA/879/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected Devesh Tiwari's bail application under Section 483 BNS for a Section 69 offense. Tiwari was charged with breaching promises of marriage to a woman with whom he maintained a 6-7 year relationship, resulting in her pregnancy in October 2025, and subsequently marrying another woman on April 21, 2026, despite repeated assurances of marriage and family inducements. The court found the prosecutrix's allegations credible and serious, citing her vulnerability and the manner of alleged commission, determining no case for bail existed at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice

  4. 11-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MCRCA/879/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MCRCA/879/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court rejected Devesh Tiwari's bail application under Section 483 BNS for a Section 69 offense. Tiwari was charged with breaching promises of marriage to a woman with whom he maintained a 6-7 year relationship, resulting in her pregnancy in October 2025, and subsequently marrying another woman on April 21, 2026, despite repeated assurances of marriage and family inducements. The court found the prosecutrix's allegations credible and serious, citing her vulnerability and the manner of alleged commission, determining no case for bail existed at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case