Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:47894 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6352 of 2025 1 - Sameer Singh Thakur S/o Nirmal Singh Thakur Aged About 24 Years R/o Bunkar Society, Ward No.08, Amapara, Police Station Azad Chowk, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh versus ---Applicant 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Devendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 6390 of 2025 1 - Pankaj Vaswani S/o Santosh Vaswani Aged About 24 Years R/o Sindhi Colony, Jarhabhata P.S. Civil Lines, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Dipanshu Gupta S/o Dileep Gupta Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Manoharpur Post And P.S. Manoharpur District - Paschimsingh Bhum Jharkhand 3 - Pratik Soni S/o Dharmdas Soni Aged About 20 Years R/o Sindhi Colony, Jarhabhata P.S. Civil Lines District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Sandeep Amrani S/o Late Devanand Amrani Aged About 30 Years R/o Beside Shiv Talkies Camp Umaria, P.S. Kotwali District - (M.P.) 5 - Ankul Mishra S/o Kaushlesh Mishra Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Manoharpur, Post And P.S. Manoharpur District - Paschimsingh Bhum Jharkhand, 6 - Roshan Kumar Thakur S/o Angeshwar Kumar Thakur Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Gilritola Post Andoli District - Dharbhanga Bihar 7 - Ravi Sajnani S/o Hiranand Sajnani Aged About 36 Years R/o Green Orchid Daldal Sevni Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2025.09.19 20:26:08 +0530 House No. J-11 P.S. Pandri District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 8 - Taju Masih S/o Hadayat Masih Aged About 42 Years R/o Katib Batala P.S. Batala District - Gurdaspur Punjab Present R/o Camp 02, Shardapara Sindhi Chowk Bhiali District - Durg (C.G.) 9 - Kushal Sahu S/o Pakalu Sahu @ Ramdev Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Ward No. 12, P.S. Chakarbhata District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 10 - Jeet Singh S/o Pradeep Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Camp -01 Steel Nagar, Bhilai P.S. Chawni District - Durg (C.G.) 11 - Sujal Ruprela S/o Late Purshottam Ruprela Aged About 19 Years R/o Gali No. 3, Katora Talab P.S. Civil Lines District- Raipur (C.G.)
Legal Reasoning
trial. As explained by this Court in Nimmagadda Prasad [(2013) 7 SCC 466], the words used in Section 45 of the 2002 Act are "reasonable grounds for believing" which means the Court has to see only if there is a genuine case against the accused and the prosecution is not required to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt." 12. In the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2007) 11 SCC 195, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "at the stage of granting of bail, the Court can only go into the question of prima facie case established for granting bail, it cannot go into the question of credibility and reliability of witnesses put up by the prosecution. The question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses can only be tested during trial." 13. In the present case, there are various seizures of laptops, mobile phones, bank passbooks, ATM cards etc., which were in the names of different persons. The prosecution’s case is based on the memorandum and seizure of various incriminating articles from the 10 accused persons, which were found in their possession, and the data from the electronic devices. Having in possession such a huge quantity of mobile phones, bank passbooks and ATM cards in the names of different persons would create suspicion about their business. It’s an online gambling site and has organized crime. 14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. CBI, reported in (2013) 7 SCC 439 has held in para 34 and 35 of its judgment that "34. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep- rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. 35. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. 15. Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties, as also from the material produced in the present case, it is not acceptable that the present applicants did not know about the transactions. Seizure of mobile phones, ATM cards, bank Passbooks and SIM cards from the applicants clearly demonstrates their association with the others, who were engaged with online gambling. Denial by the applicants themselves is not sufficient to consider prima 11 facie that there is no mens rea of the applicants for the said offence. Although the electronic evidence and statements of the witnesses are required to be tested at the time of trial; however, for the consideration of bail application, the seizure of a huge quantity of electronic devices, electronic evidence and the statements of the witnesses are relevant. 16. As has been discussed hereinabove, it cannot be said that there is no involvement of the applicants in the offence in question. It is an organized crime having various facets of its complexion; therefore, further considering the nature of the offence and material collected during the investigation, this Court is satisfied that there is prima facie evidence for believing that the applicants are involved in the offence; therefore, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 17. Consequently, the present bail application filed by the applicants, Sameer Singh Thakur (M.Cr.No. 6352/2025), Saif Ali (M.Cr.C. No. 6357/2025), Divya Chandrawanshi (M.Cr.C. No. 6366/2025) and (1) Pankaj Waswani, (2) Dipanshu Gupta, (3) Pratik Soni, (4) Sandeep Amrani, (5) Ankul Mishra, (6) Roshan Kumar Thakur, (7) Ravi Sajnani, (8) Taju Masih, (9) Kushal Sahu, (10) Jeet Singh, (11) Sujal Ruprela, (12) Anurag Daharia, (13) Hardeep Singh and (14) Bhanu Singh Rajput (M.Cr.C. No. 6390/2025) are hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil
Arguments
12 - Anurag Dahariya S/o Umesh Dahariya Aged About 25 Years R/o Shrivastava Colony, P.S. Kodipura District - Chhindwara (M.P.) 13 - Hardeep Singh S/o Sukhpal Singh Aged About 19 Years R/o In Front Of Station Manoharpur P.S. Manoharpur District - Paschimsingh Bhum Jharkhand 14 - Bhanu Singh Rajput S/o Sanjeev Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Baipur, P.S. Sikandara, District - Agra (U.P.) Versus ---Applicants 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) P.S. Devendra Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 6366 of 2025 1 - Divy Chandrawanshi S/o Akash Chandrawanshi Aged About 19 Years R/o Bunkar Society, Ward No. 08, Amapara, Police Station Azad Chowk, District Raipur (C.G) (As Per Correct Details) Versus ---Applicant 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Devendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 6357 of 2025 1 - Saif Ali S/o Liyakat Ali Aged About 21 Years R/o House No.4/818, Ward No.38, Opposite Azad Chowk Police Station Amapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh Versus ---Non-applicant 3 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) Police Station Devendra Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Non-applicant (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicants : Mr. Y.C. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aishwary Diwan, Advocate in MCRC No.6352 of 2025 and MCRC No.6366 of 2025. Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate in MCRC No.6357 of 2025 and MCRC No.6390 of 2025. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 17-09-2025 1. All these regular bail applications are arising out of the same crime number and for the same offence; therefore, they are being heard and decided together. 2. These are the first bail applications filed by the applicants under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short “BNSS”) for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested on 15-04-2025, 16-04-2025, 25-04-2025 and 21-06-2025, in Crime No. 73 of 2025, registered at Police Station Devendra Nagar, Raipur, for the offence under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 112(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short “BNS”), Section 4(a) of the Public Gambling Act, and Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 and Section 25(C) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. 3. The prosecution’s case in brief is that, on 13-04-2025, the police of Devendra Nagar, Raipur, received secret information that the co-accused Nikhil Wadhwani is engaged in online gambling. They conducted a raid and arrested Nikhil Wadhwani, who disclosed that he is engaged in playing online gambling through the “Rajveer online book” through his mobile Nos. 7987974436 and +94725211590. On 4 being interrogation, he also disclosed the mobile numbers of others who are connected through other states of the country, i.e. 6263232022, 6238190441, 9669096065 and 7997009800. Based on the information, the police conducted raid at Ashiyana Apartment, Kolkata (W.B.) and arrested Pankaj Waswani, Dipanshu Gupta, Prateek Soni, Sandeep Amrani, Ankush Mishra and Roshan Kumar Thakur. From Tulsi Apartment, Kolkata (W.B.), they have arrested Ravi Sajnani and Taju Masih. From Mahendri Apartment, Beltola, Guwahati (Assam), they have arrested Kushal Sahu, Jeet Singh, Sujal Ruprela, Anurag Daharia, Hardeep Singh and Bhanupratap Singh Rajput. From Rajpur Road, Dehradun (Uttarakhand), they have arrested Rahul Sahu @ Bhari, Anand Kumar Das, Divya Chandrawanshi, Toshan Dewangan, Devesh Kumar and Sameer Singh Thakur. From Devendra Nagar, Raipur, they have arrested Saif Ali @ sobu. All of them were engaged in online betting apps and gambling. There are 23 accused persons arrested, and some are still absconding. 4. From the accused Nikhil Wadhwani, one mobile phone and Rs. 1200/- cash were seized. From Pankaj Waswani, 01 Laptop, 14 mobile phones, and 08 bank passbooks have been seized. From Dipanshu Gupta, 01 Laptop, 02 mobile phones, 08 bank passbooks, and 05 ATM cards have been seized. From Sandeep Amrani, 04 mobile phones, 04 bank passbooks, and 07 ATM cards have been seized. From Prateek Soni, 03 mobile phones, 04 bank passbooks, and 05 ATM cards have been seized. From Ankur Mishra, 01 Laptop, 04 mobile phones, 02 bank passbooks, 20 ATM cards and 02 Registers in which accounts were maintained, have been seized. From 5 Roshan Kumar Thakur, 01 mobile phone has been seized. From Ravi Sajnani, 14 mobile phones, 01 bank passbook, 28 ATM cards, 15 SIM cards, 03 Laptops, 03 Computer Key-Board, 02 Router, 07 mobile/Laptop charger, and 01 Register in which the account of gambling is mentioned. From Taju Masih, 01 mobile phone, 01 Table Camera, and 03 power extension boards have been seized. From Sujal Ruprela, 01 Laptop, 05 mobile phones, and 02 bank passbooks have been seized. From Jeet Singh, 01 Laptop, 05 mobile phones, 02 bank passbooks have been seized. From Kushal Sahu, 08 mobile phones, 01 ATM card have been seized. From Anurag Daharia, 06 mobile phones, 01 ATM card and 06 SIM cards have been seized. From Hardeep Singh Mehra, 05 mobile phones, 02 bank passbooks, 01 Router have been seized. From Bhanupratap Singh, 05 mobile phones, 01 ATM card and 01 Cheque Book have been seized. From Rahul Sahu @ Bhari, 01 Laptop, 07 mobile phones and 02 mobile chargers have been seized. From Sameer Singh Thakur, 01 Laptop, 07 mobile phones have been seized. From Nitesh Kumar Sahu, 01 Laptop, 07 mobile phones have been seized. From Anand Kumar Das, 01 Laptop, 06 mobile phones, 02 extension boards, 02 ATM cards and 01 Router have been seized. From Divya Chandrawanshi, 01 Laptop, 06 mobile phones have been seized. From Toshan Dewangan, 06 mobile phones, 02 ATM cards, 01 pocket diary, 01 Router and 03 mobile chargers have been seized. From Devesh Kumar, 01 Laptop, 06 mobile phones have been seized. From Saif Ali, 02 mobile phones have been seized. All the bank passbooks and ATM cards are in the names of different persons. 6 5. The seized electronic devices were sent for examination by a cyber expert to extract their data, and it was found that various huge transactions of money were made through bank accounts. The suspected bank accounts were frozen by the police. In the memorandum statement of the accused persons, they disclosed their network of online gambling and the manner in which they managed it. 6. After the due process of investigation, the charge sheet is filed against the arrested accused persons before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur. 7. Mr. Y. C. Sharma, Learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the applicants in M.Cr.C. No. 6352/2025 and M.Cr.C. No. 6366/2025, would submit that the investigating agency has acted most arbitrarily, and it had nothing but an ill-motivated and mala fide intention to implicate the applicants in the offence. They have no connection or association in any way in receiving the proceeds of crime. He would further submit that the prosecution has failed to establish the link between the present applicants with the alleged offence. He would further submit that in order to save the other accused persons, the present applicants have been implicated in the offence. There is no evidence against the present applicants that they were actively involved in operating any betting app, but it is alleged that certain SIM cards and mobile phones have been seized from them, which were used for online betting and money transactions. He would further submit that there is no evidence collected by the prosecution that the mobile phones and SIM cards, which are allegedly seized from the applicants, are actually used in an online betting app. The prosecution 7 agency has collected the electronic evidence, for which there is no basis that the applicants are involved in the offence. There are no ingredients of cheating in the material collected during the investigation. The electronic evidence collected by the prosecution is a very weak type of evidence, on which there is no possibility of sustaining a conviction of the applicants. The applicants have been in jail since 25-04-2025, and there is every possibility of delay in the conclusion of the trial. The investigation is completed, and no custodial interrogation is required. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail. 8. Mr. Devershi Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the applicants in the M.Cr.C. No. 6357/2025 and 6390/2025, would submit that no offence of either cheating, forgery of valuable security, using as genuine a forged document as genuine, any criminal conspiracy, or even causing the disappearance of any evidence has been registered against the applicants. He would further submit that in the charge sheet, it is alleged against the present applicants that they gained an unfair economic advantage by various illegal means, by providing mobile phones and SIM cards for online gambling, which makes them liable to be punished for the alleged offences, but there is no specific allegation against the applicants relating to any illegal act. No person was cheated by the applicants. The main accused, Nikhil Wadhwani, has been released on his personal bond by the police. There is no evidence that the applicants conspired with the other co-accused persons. The applicants have been in jail since 15-04-2025, 16-04- 2025 and 21-06-2025, and to date, only a charge sheet has been filed, 8 and even the charges have not been framed; therefore, there is every possibility of delay in trial, and the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the submissions of learned counsel for the respective applicants and has submitted that during the investigation, from the mobile phone of the accused persons, their network was unveiled, and the involvement of the other accused persons were found. From the analysis of their mobile phones, a huge network throughout the country was found, and it was also found that they are actively engaged in online gambling and money transactions through bank accounts. The other accused persons are still absconding. She would further submit that from the memorandum statement of the accused persons, the involvement of the applicants in the offence in question has been duly connected. Seizure of a huge numbers of mobile phones, bank passbooks and ATM cards, etc., itself demonstrated that they were engaged in illegal activities of online gambling. In the present case, there is sufficient evidence available against the present applicants that they are involved in the alleged offence and looking to the seriousness of the offence, they are not entitled to be released on bail. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed in the present case by both parties. 11. For consideration of the bail application of the applicant, the Court need not go deep into the merits of the case, but should consider the prima facie material against the accused in the case. The Hon'ble 9 Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case (supra) has observed in para 401 of its judgment that:- "401. We are in agreement with the observation made by the Court in Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma [(2005) 5 SCC 294). The Court while dealing with the application for grant of bail need not delve deep into the merits of the case and only a view of the Court based on available material on record is required. The Court will not weigh the evidence to find the guilt of the accused which is, of course, the work of Trial Court. The Court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of reasonable material collected during the investigation and the said view will not be taken into consideration by the Trial Court in recording its finding of the guilt or acquittal during trial which is based on the evidence adduced during the