Ritik Mandilwar @ Bamfod Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by ALOK ALOK SHARMA SHARMA Date:2026.01.07 10:52:42 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 10527 of 2025

¶6

1 - Ritik Mandilwar @ Bamfod S/o Vimal Mandilwar Aged About 24 Years R/o - Near Joda Talab, Sattipara, Ambikapur, District - Surguja (C.G.) (Father's Name Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure A/1)

¶7

... Applicant(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur (C.G.) (As Per Fir) Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure A/1

¶10

... Non-applicant(s)

¶11

For Applicant(s) : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board

¶13

06/01/2026

¶14

This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissal on merits vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed by this Court in MCRC No. 4188/2025. The applicant is seeking bail who has been arrested on 07.05.2025 for the offence of Crime No. 325/2024 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja for the offence under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC and 7 and 8 of Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that on 13-05-2024, the police of Police Station Ambikapur received secret information that 03 persons, namely Ayush Sinha @ Deep Sinha, Amit Mishra and Shubham Keshari, are engaged in online gambling through their mobile phone by using the

¶16

2

¶17

skyexchange betting app and betting on the IPL cricket match between Gujrat Titans versus Kolkata Knight Riders. On a raid being conducted, the police have arrested the 03 accused persons who were engaged in playing online gambling. They were taken to the police station and interrogated by the police. From their mobile phone, sufficient evidence of their involvement in online gambling was found, and from Ayush Sinha @ Deep Sinha 03 mobile phones, 03 passbooks and a cheque book were seized which are in the name of other persons, from the accused Shubham Keshari one mobile phone, one cheque book, 13 ATM cards of various persons were seized and from the accused Amit Mishra 15 mobile phones, 08 ATM cards of various persons, one cheque book and cash of Rs. 20100/- has been seized. When the details of the bank account were obtained, it was found that the bank account was opened fraudulently, and the persons in whose names the bank account is running have no knowledge of their bank account. Statements of the account holders were recorded, who disclosed the name of the present applicant, stating that in his instance, the mule account was opened in the bank. From the statement of Abhas Paswan, the name of the applicant appears that he has got opened his bank account, which has been used in money transactions of online gambling. The applicant is arrested on 07-052025, and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no direct evidence against the applicant to connect him with the offence in question. He is in jail since 07.05.2025 and till date there is no considerable progress in the trial of the case. The co-accused Dhruvil Patel has been released on bail by the order dated 05.01.2026 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(Crl.) No. 20654/2025, therefore, the applicant may also be enlarged on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions and would submit that the first bail application of the applicant has been

¶20

3

¶21

dismissed on merits after considering the allegations and the evidence available in the charge-sheet against the applicant. There is no change in circumstances after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the petition.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation, further considering the evidence available in the charge-sheet against the present applicant, the manner in which the accused persons organized the crime, the allegation against the present applicant and further this Court does not find any change in circumstances, this Court does not inclined to admit the second bail application of the applicant.

¶24

Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is rejected .

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

¶27

Judge

¶28

Alok

Ritik Mandilwar @ Bamfod v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik Mandilwar @ Bamfod v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Royden Harold Buthello Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deniyal Tandi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gajendra Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Panchram Chauhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shyamlal Choudhary Vs Sukanti Patel

Ankit Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh