Dismissed

Sulabh Khandelwal Urf Chote Babu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/7854/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected seven regular bail applications filed by individuals arrested in connection with an organized online gambling syndicate. The court held that the evidence suggested a substantial network involving Hawala transactions, despite prior bail in related cases, warranting denial of bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail applications for all seven applicants were rejected. They remain in custody.

Sulabh Khandelwal Urf Chote Babu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.09.17 10:44:30 +0530

¶3

CGHC010322722026 2026:CGHC:40309

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 7854 of 2026

¶7

1 - Sulabh Khandelwal Urf Chote Babu S/o Sunil Kumar Khandelwal Aged About 35 Years R/o Ramsagar Para Hanuman Mandir Gali, Raipur Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Prakash Wadhwani S/o Jagdish Wadhwani Aged About 29 Years R/o Chaube Colony, Near Haif Warth Hospital, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

--- Applicants

¶10

versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh

¶12

--- Respondent

¶13

MCRC No. 8155 of 2026

¶14

Jasmit Singh Bagga S/o. Lt. Manjit Bagga, Aged About 38 Years R/o. Bande Ali Fhatmi Nagar, M. I. G. - 06, P/ S City Kotwali, District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶15

--- Applicant

¶16

Versus

¶17

State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶18

--- Respondent

¶19

MCRC No. 7934 of 2026

¶20

Amit Kumar Mittal S/o Anup Kumar Agrawal Aged About 30 Years R/o Station Road Kharsiya, District Raigarh, C. G.

--- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P. S. Gharghoda, District Raigarh, C. G.

¶25

--- Respondent

¶26

MCRC No. 7932 of 2026

¶27

Akash Kumar Motwani S/o Deepak Motwani Aged About 33 Years R/o Kachahari Chowk Sindhi Gali, Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)

¶28

Versus

¶29

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Gharghoda, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.)

¶30

--- Respondent

¶31

MCRC No. 7856 of 2026

¶32

1 - Rahul Khandelwal S/o Late Vinod Khandelwal Aged About 40 Years R/o Ramsagar Para, P.S. Azad Chowk, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶33

2 - Mohit Somani S/o Murlidhar Somani Aged About 40 Years R/o C-4, Samta Colony, P.S. Azad Chowk, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶34

--- Applicants

¶35

Versus

¶36

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh

¶37

... Respondent

¶38

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶39

		Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate (in MCRC No. 8155 of 2026)
For Applicant(s)	:	Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate (in MCRC No. 7854 of 2026 and MCRC No. 7856 of 2026)
		Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, Advocate (in MCRC No. 7934 of 2026 and MCRC No. 7932 of 2026)
For Respondent(s)/State	:	Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Deputy G.A. Ms. Richa Sahu, Panel Lawyer Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer

¶40

¶41

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

¶42

Order on Board

¶43

15/09/2026

¶44

All these regular bail applications arise out of the same crime number, and therefore, they are being heard and decided together.

¶45

The details of the MCRC numbers and the applicants are given hereinbelow which is as under:-

¶46

Case Numbers	Name of Applicants	Date of Arrest
MCRC No. 7932/2026	Akash Kumar Motwani	13.05.2026
MCRC No. 7856/2026	(1) Rahul Khandelwal	11.06.2026
	(2) Mohit Somani	11.06.2026
MCRC No. 7854/2026	(1) Sulabh Khandelwal @ Chhote Babu	11.06.2026
	(2) Prakash Wadhwani	11.06.2026
MCRC No. 7934/2026	Amit Kumar Mittal	13.05.2026
MCRC No. 8155/2026	Jasmit Singh Bagga	18.05.2026

¶47

All the applicants are claiming regular bail in connection with Crime No. 148 of 2026, registered at Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022, Sections 111, 3(5), 61(2), 238 and 336(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶48

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.04.2026, the Police of Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh received secret information that accused Bharat Goyal was engaged in online gambling in relation to a cricket match between Kolkata Knight Riders and Lucknow Super Giants and was present at Goyal Trading

¶49

¶50

shop. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a raid and apprehended the aforesaid accused Bharat Goyal, who was allegedly found actively engaged in online gambling and, upon seeing the police party. During interrogation, he disclosed that the proceeds of the online gambling were being transacted through the bank accounts of Karan Choudhary and Jasmit Singh Bagga @ Gudda Sardar through their respective UPI accounts 7611122222@ibl and jas76111@ybl that the said persons were managing the overall operation of the online gambling activity. The bank account details of Jasmit Singh Bagga were obtained, and the case diary was forwarded to the Cyber Cell, Raigarh.

¶51

It is further the case of the prosecution that on 12.05.2026, accused Karan Choudhary was taken into custody and his memorandum statement was recorded, wherein he disclosed that he was involved in online gambling along with other accused persons, namely, Amit Mittal, Mohit Sonwani, Rahul Khandelwal, Sulabh Khandelwal, Akash Motwani and Prakash Wadhwani, and that, for the purpose of concealing the proceeds of the online gambling, Hawala transactions were being undertaken through the co-accused Sunil Kumar Agrawal and Pushkar Agrawal. It is alleged that, upon their apprehension, the applicants disclosed their involvement in Hawala transactions for concealment of the proceeds of online gambling at various places, namely, Raipur, Sakti, Kharsia and Delhi, and that certain cash amounts had been kept at their respective residences. In Crime No. 218 of 2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, cash amounting to Rs. 50 lakhs, one currency-counting machine and a mobile phone were seized from Sunil Kumar Agrawal, whereas cash

¶52

¶53

amounting to Rs. 52,60,300/-, kept in three bags, along with two mobile phones, was seized from Pushkar Agrawal. They were also implicated in Crime No. 147 of 2026 registered at Police Station Gharghoda, which is the present case. During the investigation, 01 Mobile Phone, 01 Notebook and 01 Pen have been seized from the applicant Sulabh Khandelwal. 02 Mobile Phones and 01 Notebook have been seized from Prakash Wadhwani, 10 Mobile Phones, 03 Notebooks, 01 Laptop bag, 01 Tab, 02 Laptops, 02 Pen, 01 Voter ID Card and Printed Papers of Account have been seized from the applicant Rahul Khandelwal. 04 Mobile Phones, 02 Laptops, 01 Notebook and 01 Pen have been seized from the applicant Mohit Somani. 02 Mobile Phones, 01 Laptop, 01 Aadhar Card, 01 Wallet, Pen Card, Driving License and 01 Dragon Fly Card have been seized from the applicant Amit Mittal. 01 Mobile Phone has been seized from the applicant Jasmit Singh Bagga. The applicants have been arrested and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against them.

¶54

The investigation further revealed that certain accused persons were operating the alleged betting network from Goa and the present applicants were conducting their betting operations from Candolim, Goa. They used APK based television application, which allegedly displayed the match several seconds ahead of normal television transmission. They obtained betting rates from Abhinandan Book. The accused Pushkar Agrawal and Sunil Agrawal transferring the betting money through Hawala transactions through cash, petrol pump account and intermediary. The applicants have been arrested and charge sheet have been filed against them.

¶55

¶56

Mr. Awadh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for applicant Jasmit Singh Bagga (MCRC No. 8155 of 2026) would submit that, from the applicant only one mobile has been seized. He is falsely implicated in the offence based on memorandum statement of other accused persons. There is no bank account details that the amount has been transacted through his bank account or he is the beneficiary of the money transaction through online betting operation. Nothing has been recovered from his phone, which directly connects him from the alleged offence. The electronic evidence is not sufficient to implicate him in the offence in question. The police has arrested him on the basis of the conversation made with Karan Choudhary, whereas both of them were the members of Shri Shyam Lakhdatar Sewa Samiti, Raigarh and in course of their business of the said Sewa Samiti, they made conversations with each others, which the police has made conversation with respect to the alleged betting operation. Two other crime numbers bearing Crime Nos. 217/2026 and 218/2026 also registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, in which the applicant has been enlarged on bail. The applicant is having no criminal antecedent except for the present offences. He is in jail since 18.05.2026, investigation has been completed and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶57

Mr. Hariom Rai, learned counsel appearing for the applicant Sulabh Khandelwal @ Chhote Babu and Prakash Wadhwani (MCRC No. 7854 of 2026), Rahul Khandelwal and Mohit Somani (MCRC No. 7856 of 2026) would submit that, initially Goutam, Laxminarayan and Sagar were apprehended by the police, who disclosed the name of

¶58

¶59

Karan Choudhary and Jasmit Bagga. In the memorandum statements of Karan Choudhary and Jasmit Bagga, the names of present applicants disclosed. As per Section 23 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the memorandum statements are not admissible and except this, there is no connecting evidence available in the charge sheet against the applicants. Though the mobile phones, etc. have been seized from the applicants, however, there is no sufficient evidence or cyber analysis report, which prima facie disclosed commission of any offence are linked the present applicants with the alleged offence. The memorandum statements and seizure memos were prepared in Crime Nos. 217/2026 and 218/2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh and in the present case, there is no separate memorandum or seizure from the applicants and all the materials collected in the offence registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh have been considered in the present offence also. The applicants have already been released on bail in Crime Nos. 217/2026 and 218/2026 of Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh by the learned trial Court. Though the applicants having some criminal antecedents, but that itself is not sufficient to reject their bail applications. The investigation has been completed and no custodial interrogation is required. Therefore, they may be released on bail.

¶60

Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the applicant Amit Kumar Mittal (MCRC No. 7934 of 2026) and Akash Kumar Motwani (MCRC No. 7932 of 2026) would submit that, initially the offence was registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh bearing Crime Nos. 217/2026 and 218/2026, thereafter the present

¶61

¶62

offences have been registered at Police Station Gharghoda, only when the present applicants have been released on bail by the learned trial Court in the offence registered at City Kotwali, Raigarh. He would further submit that, even if the prosecution case is to be taken as it is, the offence under Section 111 of the BNS, 2023 would not be attracted, as the alleged offence does not satisfy the ingredients of the organized crime. Total 44 witnesses have been cited in the charge sheet, trial of the case will take its own time, the applicants are in jail since 13.05.2026. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶63

Per contra, Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Deputy G.A., Ms. Richa Sahu, Panel Lawyer and Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer appearing for the State oppose the submissions advanced on behalf of the respective applicants and submits that, in the memorandum statements of co-accused persons Goutam Bhojwani, Sagar Gupta and Laxminarayan Sidar, the name of accused Karan Choudhary and Jasmit Singh Bagga surfaced. Upon interrogation, Karan Choudhary and Jasmit Singh Bagga disclosed the names of other accused persons, including the present applicants, who were allegedly involved in concealing the proceeds of online gambling through Hawala transactions. It is submitted that a substantial amount of cash, totaling Rs.1,02,60,300/-, has been seized from the accused Sunil Kumar Agrawal and Pushkar Agrawal. He would further submit that although the applicants have been granted regular bail in Crime Nos. 217 of 2026 and 218 of 2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, such relief was granted at the initial stage, when Section 111 of the BNS, 2023 was not added. During

¶64

¶65

the investigation, the huge network of online gambling was detected and then the offence of Sections 111, 336(3) and 61(2) of BNS 2023 and Section 66-D of I.T. Act, 2000 were added. Number of electronic gadgets have been seized from the accused persons, from which various screenshots and bank transactions detail, etc. have been extracted, which directly connects them with the online gambling and their syndicate. He would further submit that the accused Amit Mittal is having 08 criminal antecedents including the present offences with respect to the similar offence of online gambling at various police stations. Against the applicant Akash Motwani, 05 offences have been registered including the present offences and one is offence under Sections 498-A, 506 and 504 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Against the applicant Mohit Somani, 08 cases have been registered including the present offences, which are also of similar nature of offence of gambling prohibition act at different police stations. Against the applicant Rahul Khandelwal, 06 cases have been registered including the present offences with respect to the similar nature of offence of gambling prohibition act. Against the applicant Sulabh Khandelwal, except the present 04 offences, no other offence has been registered. Against the accused Prakash Wadhwani, 05 cases have been registered including the present offences. Against the accused Jasmit Bagga, except the present 04 offences, no other offences has been registered. Considering their huge network of online gambling, the mode of the said transactions and the matter in which they syndicate the online gambling activities, the present applicants are not entitled to be released on bail.

¶66

¶67

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary as well as the material annexed with the bail application.

¶68

The allegations against the present applicants are not confined to their mere presence or isolated participation in any betting activity, but prima facie disclose an organized online gambling/betting network in which different accused persons were allegedly assigned different roles, including operation of the betting activities, management of financial transactions and concealment of the proceeds through Hawala transactions. The investigation has further disclosed that the betting operation was being conducted from Candolim, Goa, through an APK-based television application and that betting rates were being obtained from Abhinandan Book. The prosecution has also alleged movement of betting proceeds through cash, bank/UPI accounts, petrol pump accounts and intermediaries, and a substantial amount of Rs.1,02,60,300/- has been seized from co-accused Sunil Kumar Agrawal and Pushkar Agrawal. During investigation, several electronic devices and other articles, including mobile phones, laptops, notebooks, tablet and documents relating to accounts, have been seized from the present applicants, from which, according to the prosecution, screenshots, bank transaction details and other electronic material have been extracted, allegedly connecting them with the online gambling operation and the syndicate. Thus, at this stage, the submission that the applicants have been implicated merely on the basis of memorandum statements of co-accused persons cannot be accepted, as the prosecution case is also founded upon the electronic and other material collected during investigation. The question regarding

¶69

¶70

admissibility and evidentiary value of such material is to be considered at the stage of trial. The fact that some of the applicants have been granted bail in Crime Nos. 217 of 2026 and 218 of 2026 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raigarh, also does not, by itself, entitle them to bail in the present crime, particularly when the prosecution has stated that such relief was granted at an earlier stage and that, during further investigation, Sections 111, 336(3) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 were added on the basis of subsequently collected material. Similarly, though completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet are relevant considerations, they cannot be considered in isolation from the nature and gravity of the allegations, the manner in which the alleged betting network was operated and the material collected against the applicants.

¶71

It is further relevant that the prosecution has cited 44 witnesses and the case involves substantial documentary and electronic material which is yet to be tested during trial. The case diary also reflects criminal antecedents against several applicants, including Amit Kumar Mittal, Akash Kumar Motwani, Mohit Somani, Rahul Khandelwal and Prakash Wadhwani, and the prosecution has stated that several of such antecedent cases are of similar nature concerning gambling activities. Though no antecedent other than the present offences has been pointed out against Sulabh Khandelwal @ Chhote Babu and Jasmit Singh Bagga, the allegations against them are required to be considered in the context of the material collected in the present investigation and the role attributed to them in the alleged network. Having regard to the cumulative effect of the

¶72

¶73

material available in the case diary, including the alleged organized nature of the online gambling operation, the alleged financial and Hawala transactions, seizure of substantial cash from the coaccused, seizure of several electronic devices and documents from the applicants and the electronic material allegedly connecting them with the betting network, this Court is of the view that the applicants do not deserve the discretionary relief of bail at this stage.

¶74

Accordingly, all the bail applications filed the applicants namely, Akash Kumar Motwani (MCRC No. 7932 of 2026), Rahul Khandelwal and Mohit Somani (MCRC No. 7856 of 2026), Sulabh Khandelwal @ Chhote Babu and Prakash Wadhwani (MCRC No. 7854 of 2026), Amit Kumar Mittal (MCRC No. 7934 of 2026) and Jasmit Singh Bagga (MCRC No. 8155 of 2026) are hereby rejected .

¶75

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶76

ved

Sulabh Khandelwal Urf Chote Babu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sulabh Khandelwal Urf Chote Babu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases