KALEEM MOHAMMAD KHAN vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

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