Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

CGHC010264822026 2026:CGHC:30813

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 6167 of 2026

¶6

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 (Chhattisgarh)

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station- City Kotwali, DistrictRaigarh (Chhattisgarh)

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶12

For Applicant : Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Amitesh Yadav, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Govt. Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board

¶14

20/07/2026

¶15

VED
PRAKASH
DEWANGAN
Digitally signed
by VED
PRAKASH
DEWANGAN
Date:
2026.07.21
13:49:02 +0530

¶16

This is the first bail application of the applicant- Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal, who has been arrested on 12.05.2026 in connection with Crime No. 217/2026, registered at police station City Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh for the offence under Sections 4 and 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022, Sections 111,

¶17

2

¶18

61(2), 336(3) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶19

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.

¶20

******* 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

¶21

3

¶22

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 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.

¶23

4

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the recovery of cash amount and mobile phone, itself are not sufficient to presume that the applicant is involved in online gambling. There is no independent and legally admissible evidence collected by the prosecution to connect the applicant with the offence in question. From the mobile phone, there is no incriminating data collected by the prosecution, so that his involvement in the offence along with the other co-accused persons could be substantiated. He would further submit that, there is no bank account detail of Cyber analysis report of his mobile phone to connect him with the offence in question. The applicant is a transporter and when he came to know that he was a suspect in the offence registered at City Kotwali police station on 12.05.2026, he himself made him available to the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh, but for want of case diary, his custody could not be accepted by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, however on the same day, in the evening, when the applicant came out from the court’s premises, he immediately been arrested by the police, which shows the intention of the police to take him on police custody instead the judicial custody. At the relevant point of time, he was at Rajasthan in religious function of his family. He would also submit that the other co-accused persons have been released on bail by the learned trial Court, but the bail application of the present applicant has been rejected. He would further submit that, although there are certain criminal antecedents against the applicant, but those are under the Indian Penal Code and being a transporter, the offences under the Indian Penal Code may occurred

¶25

5

¶26

time to time, but the offences under the Gambling Act are of much prior to the year 2022. At the same time, when the present offences were registered against the present applicant, two other offences have also been registered at Police Station Gharghoda for the same offence and thus, the criminal antecedents may not be considered for depriving the applicant to be released on bail. The applicant is in jail since 12.05.2026, no further custodial interrogation is required from him, till date charge sheet has not been filed and final adjudication of the trial will take its own time. Therefore, the present applicant may also be released on bail.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, and has submitted that, on 26.04.2026, on being secret information, coaccused Harshit Dewangan was arrested and from his mobile phone and his memorandum statement, the network of online gambling including and involvement of the present applicant was surfaced. From the statements of Samir Ghosh, Arvind Kock, Rachit Agrawal, Rohan Kumar Sharma, Pratham Masand, Anuj Sharma and Simar Bagga, the active participation and involvement of the present applicant in huge network of online gambling in IPL Cricket Match is appeared. The witnesses have stated in details the manner in which the applicant involved in online gambling and these witnesses are closely associated with the present applicant Karan Choudhary, who knows his routine and his activities. He would further submit that in his memorandum statement also he disclosed the network and syndicate, which they are running for online gambling. The police

¶28

6

¶29

have also recovered the CDR of his mobile phone, in which it was found that there was frequent conversations between the present applicant and Gudda Sardar, who is also an accused in the present case. From the CDR and the screenshot of the mobile phone and the manner in which the present applicant involved in online gambling disentitled him to be released on bail. He would further submit that against the present applicant as many as 19 criminal antecedents including the offences under the Gambling Act. The charge sheet has not been filed the investigation has not been completed, therefore. The bail application of the present applicant is liable to be rejected.

¶30

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

¶31

From perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the material available in the case diary prima facie indicates the active involvement of the present applicant in the alleged organised network of online betting and gambling. The statements of witnesses namely, Samir Ghosh, Arvind Kock, Rachit Agrawal, Rohan Kumar Sharma, Pratham Masand, Anuj Sharma and Simar Bagga disclose the role attributed to the present applicant in facilitating financial transactions, operating through multiple bank accounts belonging to third parties, and maintaining regular contact with the other accused persons involved in the alleged syndicate. The screenshots retrieved from the mobile phone of co-accused Harshit Dewangan, the memorandum statements of the accused persons, the Call Detail Records (CDRs) showing frequent communication between the present applicant and

¶32

7

¶33

co-accused Jasmeet Bagga @ Gudda Sardar, as well as the seizure of the applicant's mobile phone and cash amount. Further, a huge cash amount of Rs. 1,02,60,300/- has been seized from the coaccused persons Pushkar Agrawal and Sunil Agrawal on the basis of memorandum of the present applicant, which was alleged cash of online gambling. It is also significant that the investigation is still in progress and the charge-sheet has not yet been filed. At this stage, the investigating agency is stated to be tracing the money trail, collecting digital and electronic evidence, and ascertaining the complete extent of the alleged network. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the allegations pertain to organised online gambling conducted through digital platforms during IPL cricket matches, involving multiple persons and financial transactions. The material collected thus far prima facie suggests that the applicant is not merely a passive participant but is alleged to have played an active role in the operation of the alleged syndicate.

¶34

So far as the submission regarding parity is concerned, the same does not persuade this Court inasmuch as the role attributed to the present applicant appears to be distinct from that of the co-accused who have been granted bail. Likewise, although the applicant has questioned the evidentiary value of the material collected by the prosecution, such submissions relate to matters of appreciation of evidence, which cannot be conclusively examined at the stage of consideration of a bail application. Another relevant circumstance is that the applicant is stated to have as many as 19 criminal antecedents, including cases relating to gambling offences. Though

¶35

8

¶36

learned Senior Counsel submits that some of the antecedents arise out of the same transaction and others pertain to offences under the Indian Penal Code, the existence of such antecedents nevertheless constitutes a relevant factor while considering the prayer for grant of bail, particularly when the present allegations also disclose involvement in similar offences.

¶37

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the accusations, the prima facie material collected during investigation, the stage of investigation, the alleged organised nature of the offence, the criminal antecedents of the applicant, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant at this stage.

¶38

Accordingly, the bail application of the present applicant- Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal is rejected .

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶41

ved

Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Agriculture Insurance Company of India Ltd. Vs Branch Manager

Pramod Kumar Bhagat Vs Kailash Paikra

Vikas Pasi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abdul Khalik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Karan Choudhary @ Karan Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh