1 2026:CGHC:27568 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4917 of 2026 1 - Uttam Vasudev S/o Late Anand Vasudev Aged About 38 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Indira Colony, Village Lakhagarh, Police Station And Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 5267 of 2026 1 - Naman Goyal S/o Shri Rajesh Goyal Aged About 30 Years R/o Mandir Chowk, Pithora, Police Station And Tahsil Pithora, Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh S.H.O. Police Station Pithora, Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2026.07.06 11:07:29 +0530 2 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shikhar Sharma and Mr. Vaibhav A.Goverdhan, Advocates, respectively For Respondent/State : Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Dy.GA (Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Order on Board 03/07/2026 Since both the bail applications arise out of the same crime number and involve common questions of fact and law, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first applications for grant of regular bail preferred by the applicants. Applicant- Uttam Vasudev, in M.Cr.C. No.4917 of 2026, was arrested on 22.04.2026, whereas applicant-Naman Goyal, in M.Cr.C. No.5267 of 2026, was arrested on 14.04.2026 in connection with Crime No.102/2026 registered at Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund, for the offence punishable under Section 7(1) of the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.04.2026, while the police personnel of Police Station Pithora were on patrolling duty, they received secret information that applicant Naman Goyal was engaged in online gambling activities at Ward No.6, Mandir Chowk, Pithora. Acting upon the said information, the police party proceeded to the spot and found applicant Naman Goyal present there. It is alleged that, upon being questioned, he attempted to evade the queries put to him. 3 During the course of search, a mobile phone was seized from his possession and, upon examination thereof, certain screenshots and details of monetary transactions allegedly pertaining to online gambling activities were found. A cash amount of Rs.9,800/- was also seized from his possession. 4. It is further the case of the prosecution that after obtaining the printouts of the screenshots retrieved from the mobile phone and on the basis of the material so collected, the FIR was registered. During investigation, the memorandum statement of applicant Naman Goyal was recorded, pursuant to which co-accused Uttam Vasudev was arrested and a mobile phone was also seized from his possession. Upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the jurisdictional trial Court. 5. Learned counsels appearing for the applicants submits that, except for the mobile phones and the alleged screenshots stated to have been recovered therefrom, there is no cogent, independent or legally admissible material in the charge-sheet connecting the applicants with the alleged offence. It is contended that though the prosecution claims to have recovered incriminating screenshots from the mobile phone of applicant Naman Goyal, in the absence of supporting or corroborative material, the same cannot, by themselves, conclusively establish the involvement of the applicants in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that there is no reliable material demonstrating that the screenshots relied upon by the prosecution were, in fact, extracted from the mobile phone seized from applicant 4 Naman Goyal in accordance with law. 6. It is further submitted that the applicants have been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion and apprehension. Out of the five prosecution witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined so far and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. On these premises, learned counsel prays that the applicants be enlarged on bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State vehemently opposes the bail applications. He submits that incriminating digital material has been recovered from the mobile phone seized from applicant Naman Goyal, which prima facie discloses his involvement in organized online gambling activities in association with other persons. The mobile phone allegedly contains details of monetary transactions connected with online gambling activities. It is further submitted that applicant Uttam Vasudev was arrested on the basis of material collected during investigation, including the memorandum statement of applicant Naman Goyal, and a mobile phone was seized from his possession. Various screenshots and other digital material allegedly connecting him with the offence have also been extracted from the said device. 8. Learned State counsel further submits that applicant Uttam Vasudev has three criminal antecedents involving offences of a similar nature, whereas applicant Naman Goyal has four criminal antecedents of similar nature registered against him in the recent past. It is 5 contended that the trial has already commenced and, out of the five prosecution witnesses, three have been examined. The case is fixed for 13.07.2026 for examination of the remaining witnesses and, therefore, the trial is at advanced stage and is likely to conclude. In view of the nature of allegations, the material collected during investigation and the criminal antecedents of the applicants, learned State counsel prays for rejection of the bail applications. 9. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 10. Having considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during the course of investigation, particularly the digital material allegedly recovered from the mobile phones seized from the applicants, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court finds that the trial has already commenced and substantial progress has been made therein. Out of the five prosecution witnesses, three witnesses have already been examined and the case is fixed for 13.07.2026 for recording the evidence of the remaining witnesses. Thus, the trial is at an advanced stage and is likely to reach its conclusion in the near future. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that both the applicants are stated to have criminal antecedents involving offences of a similar nature, with three such cases registered against applicant Uttam Vasudev and four against applicant Naman Goyal. The recurrence of allegations of a similar nature, coupled with the material collected during investigation and the 6 advanced stage of the trial, constitutes a relevant consideration while examining the prayer for grant of bail. 11. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the material available on record, the criminal antecedents attributed to the applicants and, particularly, the fact that the trial is nearing completion, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail at this stage. Accordingly, both the bail applications are rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge