1 2025:CGHC:33913 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 949 of 2025 1 - Sanjay Kimtani S/o Ashok Kimtani Aged About 36 Years R/o Deepak Colony, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station In-Charge, Police Station Khamhardih, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Om Kukreja, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 17/07/2025 1. The present is an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 84 of 2025, registered at Police Station Khamhardih, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 6 and 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 and Sections 318(4), 112(2), 61(2), 336, 338 and 340 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.21 18:46:56 +0530 2 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 12.04.2025, the co-accused persons Jay Motwani and Goutam Madnani were found engaged in online gambling in cricket match and they have been arrested. On interrogation, they disclosed that the younger brother of Goutam Madnani namely Rakesh Madnani is operating the panel of online gambling on cricket from Delhi and then on 25.04.2025, a raid was conducted in the house of Rakesh Madnani at Delhi, he was found engaged in playing online gambling along with the other co-accused persons, Vikas Tarwani @ Babu, Vivek Narsinghani, Ghanshyam Manuja @ Babal, Gagan Tolani and Dharmendra Rajani, and they were caught red-handed. From their possession, 03 laptops, 17 mobile phones, 22 passbooks, 07 cheque books, 27 ATMs, one CP camera, 02 extension board and one register has been seized. The co-accused persons have been arrested and the FIR has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, there is no evidence against the applicant that he engaged in online gambling with other co-accused persons. Neither any electronic evidence nor any direct evidence or any incriminating material seized against the present applicant, which connects him with the offence in question. Even through the mobile phone, his involvement is not there with the offence in question. The applicant is not connected with the other co- accused persons. The other 07 co-accused persons have been released on regular bail by the learned Sessions Court vide order dated 22.04.2025, 08.05.2025, 13.05.2025, 15.05.2025 and 21.05.2025, respectively and the case of the present applicant is 3 much better than the case of co-accused persons. There is no criminal antecedent against the present applicant. He is having good reputation in the society and community, and therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that, in the memorandum statement of co-accused persons Jay Motwani and Goutam Madnani. The name of the present applicant appears that they are engaged in playing online gambling on the instance of the present applicant Sanjay Kimtani and from co-accused Jay Motwani, one mobile phone, one gambling notebook, screenshots of mobile phone and from Goutam Madnani, two mobile phones and five screenshots of mobile phone have been seized. The name of the present applicant has also come in the FIR. He would further submit that from the evidence collected during the investigation, the involvement of the present applicant with the other co-accused persons in playing online gambling is reflected. Seizure of huge number of mobile phones, passbooks, cheque books, ATM cards and other articles itself shows that all the accused persons have organized the offence of online gambling on cricket. He would also submit that the other co-accused persons have been released on regular bail, whereas the applicant is claiming anticipatory bail. Online gambling is an organized crime having various facets and impact upon the economy of the country. In view of the gravity of the offence and the manner, in which the applicant involved in the alleged offence, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 4 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made by the parties, considering the material collected during the investigation and the allegation against the present applicant regarding his involvement in the offence in question, gravity of the offence and its impact of organized crime, further considering the material against the applicant in the case diary, I am not inclined to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application filed by applicant Sanjay Kimtani is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved