AMIR ALI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCRCA/874/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010224732026

Filing Number

MCRCA/9626/2026

Filing Date

11-Jun-2026

Registration No

MCRCA/874/2026

Registration Date

12-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--ALLOWED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIR ALI

    Adv. SIDDHARTH TIWARI,RAMESH TIWARI,RAMESH TIWARI, ,Sachidanand Yadav,DIVYANSH TIWARI,SUDHIR KUMAR SAHU

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

    Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted anticipatory bail to retired IAS officer Amir Ali (78), facing charges of forgery, cheating, criminal conspiracy, and corruption related to a 1988 land acquisition cheque allegedly fraudulently altered from ₹12,840.55 to ₹5,12,840.55. The court found that Ali was not named in the original 1992 FIR, learned of his implication only in 2026 after 34 years, suffers from Parkinson's disease, and expressed willingness to cooperate with investigation, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including appearance at trial dates and non-interference with witnesses. 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/874/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Chhattisgarh High Court granted anticipatory bail to retired IAS officer Amir Ali (78), facing charges of forgery, cheating, criminal conspiracy, and corruption related to a 1988 land acquisition cheque allegedly fraudulently altered from ₹12,840.55 to ₹5,12,840.55. The court found that Ali was not named in the original 1992 FIR, learned of his implication only in 2026 after 34 years, suffers from Parkinson's disease, and expressed willingness to cooperate with investigation, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions including appearance at trial dates and non-interference with 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