1 CGHC010345502026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8484 of 2026 1 - Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal S/o Sanjay Choudhary Aged About 29 Years R/o Next To Spring Valley Colony Opposite Friends Colony, P.S. City Kotwali Raigarh Tahsil And District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Case title taken from CIS) For Applicant (s) : Mr. Amitesh Yadav, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate along with Mr. Manish Kashyap, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on board 23.09.2026 1. Heard. 2. The present is a second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the application has been rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6167/2026. 3. The applicant is claiming regular bail, who has been arrested on 13.05.2026 in connection with Crime No. 217/2026, registered at P.S. Citi Kotwali, Raigarh, for the offence under Section 4 and 7 of Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2026.09.23 17:34:53 +0530 2 2022, Section 111, 61 (2), 3(5), 336(3), 238 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 66 (D) of Information Technology Act. 4. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that, on 26.04.2026, the police of police station City Kotwali, Raigarh, while patrolling received a secret information that owner of A-1 Cafe, Gaddi Chowk, Raigarh namely Harshit Dewangan engaged in playing online gambling in IPL Cricket Match through “Line Guru” betting app. On being raid conducted by the police, he was arrested and his mobile phone has been seized. On being operation of the mobile phone, it was found that he was actively engaged in online gambling in cricket match of Chennai Super King, Gujarat Titans, Lucknow Super and KKR. Screenshot of his mobile phone was taken. On being interrogation, he disclosed the name of Jasmeet Bagga @ Gudda Sardar and Karan Choudhary (present applicant) that on their instance, he engaged in playing online gambling and the daily account has been transmitted in the account of Jasmeet Bagga through his Google Pay account of mobile No. 7611122222 and he received commission on it. FIR has been registered and she was arrested on that day and his memorandum statement was recorded. During the investigation, statements of Samir Ghosh, Arvind Kock, Rachit Agrawal, Rohan Kumar Sharma, Pratham Masand, Anuj Sharma and Simar Bagga have been recorded, who stated that the present applicant Karan was involved in online gambling and he made transaction through cash and online mode both. Karan has not made transaction through his own account, but used to make transaction in others account. He made transactions in the account of Durga Fuels, Lailunga and M.D. Fuels and thereafter collected cash from there. He used to connect through his mobile number 9302088878 with the mobile of Karan Choudhary i.e. 7241188000 and also connected with Gudda Sardar. Karan Choudhary was actively involved in online gambling. In his statement, he gave the details of the events, under which the present applicant Karan Choudhary involved in online gambling. The aforesaid other witnesses have also stated against the present applicant about his involvement in online gambling and 3 money transactions. The applicant was arrested on 12.05.2026 and his memorandum statement was also recorded, in which he too has disclosed about the involvement of online gambling and money trail. On his memorandum statement, cash of Rs. 1,02,60,300/- and the currency note counting machine and two mobile phones have been seized from the house of co-accused persons Pushkar Agrawal and Sunil Agrawal and then other accused persons Jasmeet Bagga, Amit Mittal, Mohit Sonwani, Rahul Khandelwal, Sulabh Khandelwal, Akash Motwani and Prakash Wadhwani have also been arrested. He also disclosed the manner in which they are running network of online gambling in cricket match. From the applicant, his mobile phone and Rs. 21,000/- cash have been seized. From the call detail record were also obtained with respect to the mobile phone of the present applicant, in which he was found frequently connected with the other accused Gudda Sardar. The investigation is still going on and charge sheet has not been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, the charge-sheet has been filed on 20.08.2026 and the co-accused Sanu Beriwal against whom the similar allegations have been levelled in the case have been released on bail on 07.09.2026. Since, the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and that the co-accused has been released on bail, he has filed the second bail application as there is substantive change in circumstance, therefore, by admitting the second bail application of the applicant, he may be released on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that the first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits on 20.07.2026 by this Court, thereafter, though, the charge-sheet has been filed subsequently, however, there is no change in circumstances. The applicant is having 20 criminal antecedents including the present 4 offenses and looking to the criminal antecedents and also 4 that the first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits by this Court, his second bail application is also liable to be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as gone through his first bail application. 8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering that the first bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits, keeping in view the gravity of offence and prima facie material available in the case diary and also that 20 criminal antecedents of the applicant, I am not inclined to admit the second bail application of the applicant. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application filed by the applicant is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika