1 CGHC010355562026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8631 of 2026 1 - Saddam Hussein Son Of Shri Hidayat Tula Aged About 27 Years Resident Of Mahamaya Para Nahar Road, Ambikapur, Police Station Kotwali, District Sarguja (C.G.) 2 - Ajibul Rahman Son Of Shri Mehbub Khan Aged About 25 Years Resident Of Village Tegni, Police Station Patna, District Koriya (Baikunthpur) (C.G.) --- Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Deputy G.A. MCRC No. 8712 of 2026 1 - Shivam Son Of Shri Purushotam Lal, Aged About 30 Years Resident Of Sarai Mohalla, Division No. 4, Pathankot District (Punjab) 2 - Deepak @ Deepu Chouhan Son Of Ajay Singh Chouhan, Aged About 29 Years Resident Of Village Mandiya, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Muradabad (U. P.) VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.10.05 18:31:23 +0530 2 3 - Aniket Tyagi Son Of Pankaj Tyagi, Aged About 28 Years Resident Of Village Chandpura, Police Station Anchoda, District Sambhal (U. P.) (Description Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet ) ---Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (Town), District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.). --- Respondent MCRC No. 8727 of 2026 1 - Manu S/o Shri Darshan Kumar Aged About 24 Years R/o Mamun Police Station Division No.4 Pathankot District- (Punjab) 2 - Gulshan Kumar S/o Shri Praveen Kumar Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Antour Police Station Narot Jaimalsingh Pathankot District- (Punjab) 3 - Rahul Sarmal S/o Shri Jogindra Pal Aged About 28 Years R/o Saray Mohalla Near Gurudwara Pathankor, Police Station Division No.2, Pathankot District- Pathankot (Punjab) 4 - Ritik Kumar S/o Shri Mangal Das Aged About 24 Years R/o Datiyal Police Station Narod Jaimalsingh District- Pathankot (Punjab) 5 - Lavprit Singh S/o Shri Surjeet Singh Aged About 26 Years R/o Gay Sanipur Tada, Police Station Julka, District- Patiyala (Punjab) (Description Of Applicants Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) ---Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (Town) District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent 3 MCRC No. 8705 of 2026 1 - Mukesh Soni S/o Shri Tulsiram Soni Aged About 24 Years Resident Of Pipara Adayi Goura Chowki, Police Station Khokhare, District Gonda (U.P.) 2 - Deepak Kumar Poudel S/o Shri Jeet Bahadur Poudel Aged About 27 Years Resident Of Damak, Ward No. 07, Police Station Sansari, District Tarhara (Nepal)(Description Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) ---Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (Town), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicants in MCRC Nos. 8712/2026, 8727/2026 and 8705/2026 : Mr. Satya Prakash Verma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Deputy G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 01/10/2026 1. All these bail applications are arising out of same crime number, therefore, they are being heard and decided together. 2. The details of the MCRC numbers, names of the applicants, and dates of their arrest are given hereinbelow: Case Numbers Name of Applicants Date of Arrest MCRC No. 8631/2026 (1) Saddam Hussein (2) Ajibul Rahman 10.04.2026 MCRC No. 8712/2026 (1) Shivam (2) Deepak @ Deepu Chouhan (3) Aniket Tyagi 04.04.2026 4 MCRC No. 8727 /2026 (1) Manu (2) Gulshan Kumar (3) Rahul Sarmal (4) Ritik Kumar (5) Lavprit Singh 04.04.2026 MCRC No. 8705 /2026 (1) Mukesh Soni (2) Deepak Kumar Poudel 04.04.2026 3. The applicants are claiming regular bail, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 121/2026 registered at Police Station Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara for the offence under Sections 111, 314, 317(2), 317(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 7 of Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 and Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 4. Prosecution’s case, in brief, is that on 04.04.2026, the Sub-Inspector of Police of Police Station Bhatapara City, while on night patrolling along with the police staff, received information that one Ajay Batra, resident of Bhatapara, was present near Bhatapara Railway Station and was using his mobile phone for maintaining accounts of and participating in online betting on IPL cricket matches. After recording the informer’s information and completing the requisite formalities in the presence of independent witnesses, the police party proceeded to the spot and apprehended Ajay Batra, who allegedly attempted to flee on seeing the police. Upon examination of his mobile phone, certain online links/panels, namely realplay9.com and RUVIBET, were allegedly found, showing a balance of Rs. 49,192/- and other details relating to online betting activities. Screenshots of the alleged online betting transactions and cricket betting charts were obtained from the mobile phone. A cash amount of Rs. 5,780/-, allegedly being 5 the proceeds of online betting, along with a mobile phone, SIM card and the relevant screenshots, was seized from his possession. As Ajay Batra allegedly admitted that he had been participating in online cricket betting and failed to produce any licence or authorisation for such activity, Crime No. 121/2026 was initially registered at Police Station Bhatapara City for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022, and investigation was commenced. 5. During the course of investigation, the police allegedly obtained credible information that the panels/IDs realplay9-comand RUVIBET, through which the alleged online betting activities were being operated, were being managed from Parwanoo, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. Pursuant to the directions of the Superintendent of Police and in compliance with the order issued by the Inspector General of Police, a police team was constituted and had gone to the concerned place for conducting further investigation and raid proceedings. During such investigation, it was allegedly revealed that the accused persons had formed separate groups, identified as Group Nos. 8, 35 and 27, and were operating online cricket betting and other online games through the RUVIBET panel by using mobile phones, laptops and tablets. It was further alleged that the accused persons were acting under and in association with other persons, including Avinash Patel, Avinash Shrivas, Amit Yadav, Vikas Agrawal and Tushar Bansal, and that the amounts received from customers through the online betting activities were deposited and transferred through specified bank accounts. It is further the case of the prosecution that separate memorandum statements of the accused 6 persons were recorded during investigation and, on the basis of the material collected, various mobile phones, laptops, tablets, chargers, a Jio router and other electronic devices allegedly used for operating the online betting panels were seized. The police also took action in respect of the bank accounts allegedly used for receiving and depositing the money generated through such activities. The accused persons were acting in an organised manner, had formed different groups for operating online cricket betting and other online games through electronic devices, and had allegedly earned unlawful financial gain by receiving and transferring the amounts obtained through such activities. On the basis of the material collected during investigation, Sections 314, 317(2), 317(4) and 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000, were added to the case. The accused persons, including Shivam, Raman Kumar, Manu, Gulshan Kumar, Rahul Sarmal, Ritik Kumar, Deepak alias Deepu Chauhan, Rakesh Kumar, Lavprit Singh, Aniket Tyagi, Mukesh Soni, Ankit Raj, Karandeep Singh, Saddam Hussain, Deepak Kumar Poudel and Ajibul Rahman, were arrested after informing them of the grounds of arrest and their relatives/associates were also informed accordingly. The seized electronic devices, including mobile phones, laptops and tablets, have been sent to the FSL, Raipur, for recovery and examination of the data relevant to the present crime, and the charge sheet was filed against the arrested accused persons. 6. Mr. Ramsajiwan, learned counsel appearing for the applicants in MCRC No. 8631/2026, would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the offence. The prosecution 7 case is based upon the alleged seizure of electronic devices and other articles, as well as the memorandum statements of other co- accused persons. There is no legally admissible evidence available in the charge-sheet to connect the applicants with the alleged online betting operations. The applicants were arrested only on the basis of the alleged disclosures made by the co-accused persons and the recovery of their mobile phones. The applicants are neither the owners nor the operators of the alleged betting platform, and no specific material has been collected to establish their direct involvement in accepting or facilitating bets. The electronic devices seized from the applicants are yet to be examined by the FSL; therefore, the material collected by the prosecution agency is still subject to further investigation and verification. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. They have been in custody since 10.04.2026, and the charge-sheet has already been filed. Since the final adjudication of the case is likely to take considerable time, the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 7. Mr. Satya Prakash Verma, learned counsel appearing for the applicants in MCRC Nos. 8727/2026, 8705/2026 and 8712/2026, would submit that, except for the memorandum statements of the other co-accused persons, which are inadmissible in evidence, there is no other piece of evidence available against the present applicants to connect them with the offence in question. Initially, one Ajay Batra was arrested by the police and his memorandum statement was recorded. However, the names of the present applicants have not been disclosed in the memorandum statement of Ajay Batra. The prosecution has alleged that a screenshot relating to the RUVIBET 8 online gaming app was extracted from the mobile phone of Ajay Batra. However, no panchnama has been prepared to establish that the said screenshot was actually extracted from the mobile phone of Ajay Batra. Further, no mobile number is displayed on the said screenshot. There is also no evidence to establish that Ajay Batra was using the said RUVIBET betting app. Even no document has been filed by the prosecution along with the charge-sheet to establish that the RUVIBET betting platform is a prohibited platform which cannot be operated by any person. ******* Except for the electronic devices allegedly seized from the applicants, there is no other evidence available in the charge-sheet against them. He would further submit that the prosecution has alleged commission of offences under Sections 314, 317 and 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; however, the materials available in the charge-sheet do not satisfy the ingredients of the said offences. There is no material which prima facie discloses that the present applicants are part of any syndicate of accused persons operating the online betting app. There are also no details of any bank transactions available in the charge-sheet connecting the present applicants with the transactions in question. ******* The present applicants were arrested from Pathankot, Punjab, only on the apprehension that they were also involved in the alleged betting operation along with the other accused persons. They have been in custody since 04.04.2026. No further custodial interrogation is required and the charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. The final adjudication of the 9 case is likely to take considerable time. The main person who was initially arrested by the police, namely, Ajay Batra, has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 03.08.2026 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 12468/2026, and the present applicants stand on a better footing than Ajay Batra. Therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 8. On the other hand, Mr. Atanu Ghosh, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State, would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective applicants and submit that there is prima facie material showing the active involvement of the applicants in an organised network of online cricket betting. On the basis of secret information, the police raided a place near Bhatapara Railway Station and apprehended accused Ajay Batra while he was allegedly operating the online betting activity. He would further submit that the material collected during the investigation prima facie reveals that the accused persons were acting in an organised and coordinated manner for operating an online cricket betting and gaming network through different panels/IDs, including RUVIBET and realplay9-com. It is submitted that the investigation initially commenced with the apprehension of accused Ajay Batra, from whose mobile phone links and other materials relating to online betting were allegedly recovered, and the subsequent investigation led to the discovery of a larger network operating through different groups from outside the State. ******* Learned State counsel would further submit that the memorandum statements of the accused persons, seizure of mobile 10 phones, laptops, tablets, routers and other electronic devices, as well as the material relating to the bank accounts allegedly used for receiving and transferring the proceeds of online betting, prima facie indicate the involvement of the accused persons in the organised commission of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that the accused persons were operating separate groups through electronic devices and online panels for facilitating cricket betting and other online games and were thereby deriving unlawful financial gain. The electronic devices seized from the accused persons have been sent to the FSL, Raipur, for recovery and examination of the relevant data, and the investigation into the larger network, the other persons involved, the bank accounts allegedly used, and the money trail is still underway. The allegations are serious in nature and involve the use of information technology and electronic devices for operating an organised online betting network across different States. ******* Learned State counsel would further submit that the bail applications of other co-accused persons, namely, Karandeep Singh, Raman Kumar, Rakesh Kumar and Ankit Raj, have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.08.2026 passed in MCRC No. 7260/2026. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during the investigation and the fact that the investigation into the larger network and money trail is still underway, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary, and documents annexed with the bail application. 11 10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the material available on record, this Court is of the view that the present is not a fit case for grant of regular bail to the applicants at this stage. The case initially originated from the apprehension of co-accused Ajay Batra, from whose mobile phone links/panels relating to alleged online cricket betting, namely, realplay9.com and RUVIBET, were allegedly found, and the subsequent investigation prima facie revealed the existence of a larger and organised network operating through different groups, including Group Nos. 8, 35 and 27, from outside the State. The investigation further indicates that the applicants, along with other co-accused persons, were allegedly involved in operating online cricket betting and other online games through mobile phones, laptops, tablets and other electronic devices, and that the amounts received through such activities were allegedly being deposited and transferred through different bank accounts. Various electronic devices and other articles allegedly used in the operation of the online betting panels have been seized and sent to the FSL, Raipur, for recovery and examination of the relevant data. At this stage, the Court is required to consider the material available on record prima facie and is not required to undertake a meticulous examination of the evidence or adjudicate upon the admissibility and evidentiary value of each individual piece of material. 11. The contention that the applicants have been implicated mainly on the basis of the memorandum statements of co-accused persons cannot, at this stage, be considered in isolation from the other material collected during investigation, particularly the seizure of electronic devices and the material relating to the alleged operation 12 of different online betting panels and financial transactions. The contention that co-accused Ajay Batra has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court also does not, by itself, entitle the present applicants to the same relief, as the case of each accused is required to be considered on the basis of the specific allegations, the material collected against him and his alleged role. It is also relevant to note that the bail applications of other co-accused persons, namely, Karandeep Singh, Raman Kumar, Rakesh Kumar and Ankit Raj, have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.08.2026 passed in MCRC No. 7260/2026. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the alleged organised manner in which the online betting activities were being carried out through electronic means, the inter-State nature of the alleged network, and the material relating to different groups, electronic devices and financial transactions, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicants at this stage. 12. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants, namely, (1) Saddam Hussein and (2) Ajibul Rahman in MCRC No. 8631/2026; (3) Shivam, (4) Deepak @ Deepu Chouhan and (5) Aniket Tyagi in MCRC No. 8712/2026; (6) Manu, (7) Gulshan Kumar, (8) Rahul Sarmal, (9) Ritik Kumar and (10) Lavprit Singh in MCRC No. 8727/2026; and (11) Mukesh Soni and (12) Deepak Kumar Poudel in MCRC No. 8705/2026, are hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved