KANCHAN SHRIVASTAVA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1


2026:CGHC:20712
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 662 of 2026
Kanchan Shrivastava S/o Krishna Kumar Shrivastava @ K. K. Shrivastava
Aged About 28 Years R/o Anuragh Niwas, Ward No. 11, Ayappa Mandir,
Bhartiya Nagar, Police Station Civil Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P. S. Telibandha,
Raipur, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate
assisted by Mr. Kaif Ali Rizvi, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional Advocate
General.
RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order On Board
04.05.2026
Digitally signed
by
RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
1. The applicant has preferred this Second anticipatory bail application
under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
grant of Anticipatory Bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with
Crime No. 525/2024, registered at Police Station – Telibandha, Raipur,
District – Raipur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable
under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B of the IPC and Section
238 of the BNS.
First anticipatory bail application of the applicant was rejected by this
2.
Court vide order dated 27.11.2024 passed in MCRCA No. 1319/2024,
on merits.

2
3. As per the prosecution story in brief, is that present FIR was registered
against the Applicant and his father, Mr K. K. Shrivastava alleging that
the company by the name Rawat Associates, owned by one Arjun
Rawat was approached by Mr K.K. Shrivastava in June 2023 to invest
certain money in a project to develop Raipur Smart City (hereinafter
referred to as the 'project'). It is alleged that Mr K.K. Shrivastava
informed them that a politician's brother had secured a project worth
Rs.500 crores to build Raipur Smart City. In this regard it is alleged that
Mr K.K. Shrivastava showed them certain fake documents relating to
the above-named project. Allegedly on the assurance of Mr K.K.
Shrivastav that investing Rs. 15 crores in 5 (five) different accounts
between the period of 10th July 2023 to 17th July 2023 would secure
to the complainant company the full contract for the project, the the
complainant company the full contract for the project, the said amount
was transferred. However, the contract was never granted and the
complainant company was defrauded of the said amount of Rs.15
crores. It was further alleged that the after repeated reminders to return
the money, Mr K.K. Shrivastava issued 3 (three) cheques to Arjun
Rawat to the tune of Rs. 3 crores each. The said cheques were
returned by the Bank on the ground of stopped payment. It was further
alleged that Mr K.K. Shrivastava had prepared a fake memorandum in
the name of Glomax India (Arjun Rawat's Company) and the
Chhattisgarh Government. Lastly, he threatened Arjun Rawat that he
would get him and his family killed. Hence, this application.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the first
anticipatory bail application was rejected by this Court on merits on

3
27.11.2024 passed in MCRCA No. 1319/2024 and against the said
order, the applicant has preferred an SLP being Special Leave to
Appeal (Crl) No.3697/2025 before the Hon’ble Apex Court and the
same was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.03.2025 with liberty to file a
bail application before this Court, and the Hon’ble Apex Court granted
two week’s time to the applicant to surrender in the present case, as is
apparent from the order dated 20.03.2025, and it was also directed to
decide the same, expeditiously, and thereafter, this Second bail
application was filed. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to
the applicant.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant
5.
of anticipatory bail and submitted that the allegations levelled against
the applicant is very serious in nature and involves a huge amount of
Rs. 15 Crores and preparation of forged documents. Therefore, the
present anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be
rejected.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
6.
available on record.
Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, allegations levelled
7.
against the applicant, and from the perusal of the records available, it
transpires that the first anticipatory bail application was rejected by this
Court on merits on 27.11.2024 passed in MCRCA No. 1319/2024 and
against the said order, the applicant has preferred an SLP being
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.3697/2025 before the Hon’ble Apex
Court and the same was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.03.2025 with

4
liberty to file a bail application before this Court, and the Hon’ble Apex
Court granted two week’s time to the applicant to surrender in the
present case, as is apparent from the order dated 20.03.2025, and it
was also directed to decide the same, expeditiously, and thereafter, this
Second bail application was filed, but in view of the order of the
Hon’ble Apex Court dated 20.03.2025, it appears that the applicant has
not yet surrendered, thus, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to
the applicant.
Accordingly, the Second Anticipatory Bail application of the applicant –
8.
Kanchan Shrivastava , filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in
connection with Crime No. 525/2024, registered at Police Station –
Telibandha, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for alleged commission of
offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B of
the IPC and Section 238 of the BNS, is rejected .
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar