1 CGHC010341342026 2026:CGHC:39078 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No.1444 of 2026 1 - Kaleem Mohammad Khan S/o Peer Moh. Khan Aged About 28 Years R/o House No.09 Gauripur Muslim Para, (Charaigonda), Ranhat, District- Balrampur (C.G.) Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Pratappur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, PL Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03.09.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.214/2026, registered at Police Station Pratappur, Digitally signed by R NIRALA 2 District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308 (5) & 3 (5) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case, the allegations relate to an alleged demand of money in connection with the survey work of the proposed Madan Nagar Open Cast Coal Mining Project of SECL. It is alleged that co-accused Virendra Poya demanded money from the complainant and extended threats, pursuant to which an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- was allegedly paid on 09.07.2026. During investigation, co-accused Virendra Poya was arrested and, in his alleged memorandum statement, stated that the present applicant Kaleem Khan had a share of Rs. 11,00,000/- out of the alleged amount. On the basis of the said statement, the applicant has been implicated in the present offence 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and his name does not find place in the FIR. The subsequent implication of the applicant is based upon the alleged memorandum statement of co-accused Virendra Poya, which requires strict scrutiny at the stage of consideration of bail. It is further submitted that no incriminating article or alleged extorted amount has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. The alleged statement regarding payment/share of Rs.11,00,000/- has not resulted in any recovery from the applicant, and therefore custodial interrogation of the applicant is 3 not warranted merely for the purpose of making a roving inquiry. The main/co-accused namely Virendra Poya, against whom the prosecution has alleged that he had received an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- from the complainant, has already been granted bail by the learned Court vide order dated 25.07.2026 (Annexure A/3). The applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any condition imposed by this Court, including appearance before the Investigating Officer and non-interference with the prosecution witnesses. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, as also reflected in the bail proceedings, and therefore there is no reasonable apprehension that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submit that the applicant is involved in extortion of money from the SECL employee for smooth running of the coal mining project in the village, as such he has committed a very serious offence, therefore, he may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail at this stage. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the present applicant and further considering that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and 4 the co-accused Virendra Poya has already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Trial Court, as is evident from Annexure-A/3 annexed with the bail application, therefore, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Kaleem Mohammad Khan on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- “(a) the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) the applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him/her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) the applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his/her adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) the applicant shall not involve himself/herself in any offence of similar nature in future.” Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Nirala