Dismissed

Saurabh Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Sept 2026MCRC/8697/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed the second bail application of Saurabh Jain. The applicant, already in custody since April 2026, was charged with online gambling offences. The court noted that the first bail application was rejected on merits and the trial had advanced significantly with nine of thirteen prosecution witnesses examined. Finding no change in circumstances and considering the gravity of the allegations, the court denied relief.

What did the court decide?

The second bail application of the applicant Saurabh Jain is rejected.

Saurabh Jain Vs State of Chhattisg… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010359782026

2026:CGHC:40890

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

SUMITKUMAR Digitally signedby SUMITKUMARDate:2026.09.1817:47:16+0530

¶7

MCRC No. 8697 of 2026

¶8

Saurabh Jain S/o Late Subhash Jain Aged About 38 Years R/o Sector 16, D.D. Nagar, Police Station- D.D. Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶12

... Non-applicant(s)

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hrishikesh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Pithwa, Dy,G.A. for the State

¶14

(Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

18/09/2026

¶17

This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 03.07.2026 passed by this Court in MCRC No. 5110/2026.

¶18

The applicant, who has been arrested on 26.04.2026 in connection with Crime No.188/2026 registered at Police Station – Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence under Section 6 and 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022, under Section 112(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶19

As per prosecution case, on 08.04.2026 Mahasamund Police received

¶20

¶21

a secret information that one Dipesh Goswami is actively involved in online gambling at Baba Family Dhaba, Ghodari, Mahasamund. When the police party conducted raid in the said Dhaba, they found the accused persons namely Dipesh Goswami @ Suman, Manish Sharma @ Raja@ Moosa, Hitesh @ Monu Sahu, Hitesh @ Pinku Sahu, Nanvneet Dewangan @ Babu, Ujjal Dewangan @ Raja and their mobile phones were seized. In their mobile phones various money transactions were found through Phone Pay on different dates. On interrogation, they disclosed about their syndicate and playing online gambling. Manish Sharma disclosed Power-x whatsapp group on which he was connected with Ujjal Dewangan, Nanveet Dewangan and Hitesh Sahu @ Pinku and also admitted money transaction by online gambling. When they were arrested, all of them admitted their involvement in Power-x whatsapp group and stated that Manish Sharma provided online gambling link to Dipesh Goswami and he circulated it other accused persons. From the mobile phone of other accused persons, their active involvement in the betting app of online gambling were found and they share id password thereafter the screen shots were being taken. Their memorandum statement have also been recorded in which the accused Nanveet Dewangan disclosed that on the instance of co accused Durgesh Dahare, he started playing online gambling and Durgesh Dahare provided him online betting App link of UNCKLEBET9 and user id DKAUDI14 through the present applicant Saurabh Jain and also disclosed that Saurabh Jain is earning 3 percent commission from the income of online gambling. He also disclosed the mobile number of Durgesh Dahare and online master id of betting App. When Durgesh Dahare was interrogated, he also disclosed involvement of present applicant Saurabh Jain. In his memorandum

¶22

¶23

statement, he disclosed that one year back he came in contact with Nishant Nagwani and Gore @ Dharmesh Pandit who allured him to engage with online gambling and he started playing online gambling with them. Vikky Gaba is the panel operator of UNCKLEBET9 who was earning 19 percent of its income, out of which he provided him 9 percent profit and 15 percent of UNCKLEBET777.com panel. The said panel of online gambling was forwarded to customers by him, however, Vikky Gaba was admin. Nishant Nagwani was also engaged in grand777.com and earning 12 percent, 17 percent from powerexch.com, 18 percent from vazeerx.com, 13 percent each from classic7777.com and grandexch.com and provided him 3 percent profit from that earning. Likewise Gore @ Dharmesh Pandit and other person’s involvement was disclosed. With respect to present applicant Saurabh Jain, it has been disclosed that he provided master id of UNCKLEBET9 panel @ 20 percent and Saurabh Jain retained 3 percent for himself and remaining was given to Nanveet Dewangan who forwarded the said id link to other customers for online gambling. Numerous mobile links forwarded to other persons, mobile phones and transactions have been disclosed by Durgesh Dahre in his memorandum statement and then the present applicant Saurabh Jain was also arrested on 26.04.2026. After investigation, charge sheet was filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant on 03.07.2026, total 09 witnesses have been examined out of which 04 witnesses have not supported the prosecution’s case. While rejecting the first bail application of the applicant, this Court has observed that the applicant

¶25

¶26

is the share-holder of the betting app platform, whereas from the evidence of the witnesses, nothing revealed that the present applicant is the share-holder of the said betting platform, the applicant is in jail since 26.04.2026, final adjudication of the case will take its own time and there is no custodial interrogation required, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and have submitted that the first bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits. Out of total 13 cited witnesses, 09 witnesses have already been examined and the trial is at its advance stage, therefore, in such advance stage of trial, the applicant may not be released on bail as his first bail application has already been rejected on merits and there is no change is circumstances.

¶28

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the document annexed with the bail application.

¶29

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation, gravity of the offence as well as the rejection of the first bail application of the applicant on merits vide order dated 03.07.2026 and also that out of 13 cited witnesses, 09 witnesses have already been examined before the learned trial Court and the trial is at its advance stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶30

Accordingly, the second bail application of the present applicant, Saurabh Jain, is rejected .

¶31

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶32

Sumit

Saurabh Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Jain 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