1 2026:CGHC:15427 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2970 of 2026 Govind Sonwani S/o . Shri Bhojram Sonwani, Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Bade Jalli, Thana- Fasterpur, Distt. Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Fasterpur, District- Mungeli (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navneet Singh Gumber, Advocate and Mr. Chanmeet Singh Chhabra, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 02/04/2026 1. This is the second bail application of the applicant. 2. The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 110/2026. 2 3. The applicant is arrested on 04.11.2025 in connection with crime No. 91/2025 registered at Police Station – Fasterpur, District – Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022. 4. The case of the prosecution is that, on 04.11.2025, the police of Police Station Fasterpur received a secret information that a person is engaged in playing chit gambling at village Bade Jalli, Mahamaya Chowk. The police conducted a raid over there and arrested the present applicant, who was actively engaged in chit gambling, and from him, one gambling chit, one dot pen, and cash of Rs. 920/- and two Redmi mobile phones have been seized. The offense has been registered. The memorandum statement of the present applicant was recorded, in which he disclosed that he along with other co-accused Yogendra Sharma are engaged in chit gambling since 2021 and he is working for the said co-accused Yogendra Sharma and transferred the amount through mobile PhonePe. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the present applicant. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the most important witnesses in the case that is the seizure witnesses have been examined before the learned trial Court as PW-1 and PW-2 and both of them have not supported the prosecution’s case and have turned hostile. The case of the prosecution is based mostly on these two witnesses and there would be no possibility of ultimate conviction of the applicant. He is in jail since 04.11.2025, final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore, he filed his second bail application. 3 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application. 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, further considering the nature of allegation and fact that the first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 19.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 110/2026, the applicant is having criminal antecedent of the similar nature of offences and the trial is in progress, I am not inclined to consider it to be a change in circumstances. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is dismissed at the motion stage. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE Sumit