logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Ch HC 136 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Chhattisgarh
Case No : MCRC No. 7161 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL
Parties : Rohit Singh Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Ganj, Raipur (C.G.)
Appearing Advocates : For the Applicant: Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ghanshyam Kashyap, Dy.G.A.
Date of Judgment : 05-08-2026
Head Note :-
Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 - Section 7 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 CGHC 34365,
Judgment :-

1. Present is a second bail application of the applicant who has been arrested on 17.04.2026 in connection with Crime No. 110/2026 registered at Police Station - Ganj, District - Raipur for the offence under Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 and Section 112(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits vide order dated 11.05.2026 passed by this Court in MCRC No. 4079/2026.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.04.2026, the police of Police Station - Ganj, while patrolling, received secret information that a person is engaged in online gambling in a cricket match through mobile phones, and such person was present in his Honda City Car bearing No. CG04/NS/5007 at Nagorao Gali underbridge. The police conducted a raid and arrested co-accused Mandeep Singh, who was found in the said Honda City Car. On interrogation and search of Mandeep Singh, one mobile phone and cash amounting to Rs. 95,000/- were seized from him. In his memorandum statement, he disclosed that he was engaged in online cricket gambling through the betting app "3 Stumps" and that co-accused Babu Khemani was the owner of the said online book. Kamlesh Dewangan, who is the agent of Babu Khemani, collected the cash amount from the online gambling activities. He also disclosed that Karan Khemani, Brahmanand Khemani, Shrikant Sinha and Vijay Pinjwani, mobile Nos. 9893324707, 7044930036 and 7400930036, co-accused Amit Andani, mobile No. 9111555393, Harsh Nagdev, mobile No. 9526125220, Vinod Nara, mobile No. 9399898366, Akash, mobile No. 9826197555, and Rishikesh, mobile No. 9526125220, were engaged in online gambling from Pune, Mumbai and Goa and were running betting panels for IPL cricket matches. From the mobile phones of co-accused Mandeep Singh, ID transactions from mobile Nos. 917777991972 and 917777991752, and from the mobile phone of Babu Khemani bearing No. 447782207749, ID transactions were reflected. Transactions between Kamlesh Dewangan through his mobile number to Karan Khemani, Brahmanand Khemani and Shrikant Sinha through their mobile numbers were also reflected. The involvement of the accused persons in online gambling in IPL cricket matches was extracted. Thereafter, the offence was registered and investigation was started. During the investigation, the memorandum statement of Gulshan @ Babu Khemani was recorded, in which he disclosed the involvement of the present applicant Rohit Singh, stating that he managed cash transactions in bank accounts. The accused Gulshan @ Babu Khemani also disclosed the manner in which he managed the affairs of online gambling, purchase of various properties at different places, and the involvement of other accused persons in their syndicate. The present applicant has been arrested on 17.04.2026, investigation is still going on and the charge-sheet has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that at the time when the application of the applicant was rejected on 11.05.2026, the charge- sheet was not filed. Against the rejection of the bail application of the present applicant, he preferred an SLP (Criminal) No.12866/2026 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was also withdrawn with liberty to prefer a fresh bail application before the trial Court on the ground that investigation is now over and charge-sheet has been filed, and therefore, the applicant has filed his second bail application.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that after filing of the charge-sheet, the circumstances have been changed and certain new facts came into charge-sheet. Except for the memorandum statement of the present applicant as well as other accused persons, there is no other incriminating material produced by the prosecution in the charge-sheet. Even no any analysis report of mobile phones which has been seized from the accused persons have been annexed with the charge-sheet. Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 17.04.2026, investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, therefore, he may be released on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that the first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits and there is no change in circumstances, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application.

8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation and further considering that the first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 11.05.2026 in which the role of the applicant has been considered in the organized crime of online gambling alongwith other accused persons, I do not find any change in circumstances.

9. Accordingly, the second bail application of the present applicant Rohit Singh is hereby rejected.
 
  CDJLawJournal