Mahesh Jangde Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

CGHC010226302026 2026:CGHC:29507

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 5249 of 2026

¶6

1 - Mahesh Jangde S/o Dashrath Jangde Aged About 23 Years R/o Mahasti Ward Bhatapara, P.S. Bhatapara City, Distt. Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

--- Applicant(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (Gramin), District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

--- Respondent(s)

¶11

MCRC No. 5505 of 2026

¶12

1 - Ishu Pathan @ Nanna S/o Sammi Pathan Aged About 23 Years Resident Of Mahasti Ward Bhatapara, Police Station Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

--- Applicant(s)

Versus

2

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (Gramin), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

¶17

--- Respondent(s)

¶18

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Ashwini Goverdhan, Advocate
For Respondent/State	: Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Dy.GA

¶19

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

¶20

Order on Board

¶21

13/07/2026

¶22

Both these bail applications are arising out of the same Crime number and therefore they are being heard and decided by this common order.

¶23

These are the first bail applications preferred on behalf of the applicants. Applicant- Mahesh Jangde (M.Cr.C. No. 5249 of 2026) was arrested on 23.04.2026 , whereas applicant- Ishu Pathan @ Nanna (M.Cr.C. No. 5505 of 2026) was arrested on 18.05.2026 in connection with Crime No. 199/2026, registered at Police Station Bhatapara (Gramin), District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 and Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022.

¶24

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 23.04.2026, the Police Station, Bhatapara (Gramin), received secret information that applicant Mahesh Jangde @ Naanu was engaged in the illicit sale of liquor near village Surkhi Culvert. Acting upon the said information, the police

¶25

3

¶26

conducted a raid, apprehended the applicant, and allegedly recovered 9 litres of country-made liquor along with his mobile phone. It is further alleged that, upon examination of the mobile phone, it was revealed that the applicant, in connivance with co-accused Ishu Pathan @ Nanna, was involved in chit gambling by circulating chit numbers through mobile communication. On the basis of the memorandum statement of applicant Mahesh Jangde and the data retrieved from his mobile phone, the involvement of co-accused Ishu Pathan @ Nanna was disclosed. Consequently, he was also apprehended, and two chitgambling memoranda along with his mobile phone were seized. The WhatsApp chats recovered from his mobile phone allegedly indicate his involvement in the said activities. Upon completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated. It is contended that, although 9 litres of country-made liquor were recovered from applicant Mahesh Jangde, the allegation regarding his involvement in chit gambling is based merely on suspicion, and no material recovered from his mobile phone establishes his participation in the alleged gambling activities. It is further submitted that Mahesh Jangde has three criminal antecedents, none of which pertains to offences under the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, while the remaining case under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act relates to the year 2022. Considering the quantity of liquor allegedly seized, the fact that the offences are triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, and that he has remained in custody since

¶28

4

¶29

23.04.2026, it is prayed that he be enlarged on bail.

¶30

So far as applicant Ishu Pathan @ Nanna is concerned, she submits that he has no criminal antecedents and that his implication rests solely upon the memorandum statement of co-accused Mahesh Jangde. Except for the alleged electronic evidence in the form of mobile-phone chats, there is no other incriminating material in the charge-sheet connecting him with the commission of the offence. It is further submitted that he has remained in custody since 18.05.2026, and as the trial is likely to take considerable time, he too deserves to be released on bail.

¶31

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail applications and submits that applicant Mahesh Jangde was found in possession of 9 litres of country-made liquor, and the data retrieved from his mobile phone establishes his nexus with co-accused Ishu Pathan @ Nanna, thereby indicating their involvement in chit gambling. It is further submitted that applicant Mahesh Jangde has three criminal antecedents and, therefore, neither of the applicants deserves the discretionary relief of bail.

¶32

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶33

Having regard to the rival submissions, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the fact that the offences are triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, that the investigation has been concluded and the charge-sheet has already

¶34

5

¶35

been filed, and further considering that the trial is likely to take considerable time, I am of the opinion that the applicants deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. Though applicant Mahesh Jangde has three criminal antecedents, none pertains to an offence under the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act. The applicants have remained in custody since 23.04.2026 and 18.05.2026, respectively.

¶36

Accordingly, it is directed that both the applicants shall be released on regular bail upon each of them furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-

¶37

(i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such fact to the Court.

¶38

(ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

¶39

(iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the concerned trial Court till disposal of the trial.

¶40

Digitally signed by SUGUNA SUGUNA DUBEY DUBEY Date: 2026.07.14 14:53:15 +0530

Mahesh Jangde v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Jangde v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babita Paikra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devdhar @ Devkumar Binjhwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chief Executive Officer Vs Akhilesh Kumar Singh

Ishu Pathan @ Nanna Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jagdeep Singh Chhabra Vs Ajeet Singh Chhabra

Maharshi University of Management and Technology Vs the State of Chhattisgarh