JASON STANISLOUS vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Court: Chhattisgarh High Court
Case type: MISC. CRIMINAL CASE
Decided on: 23-03-2026

<div> 1 2026:CGHC:13869 NAFR Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2026.03.25 19:24:04 +0530 INDRAJEET SAHU HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2269 of 2026 1 - Girish Dhirwani S/o Govind Ram Dhirwani Aged About 41 Years Resident Of Kashmiri Gali, Plot No. 635, Nearby Tribhuj Garden, Police Station Panch Pawali Nagpur, District Nagpur (Maharastra)(Description Of Applicant Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) --- Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 2523 of 2026 1 - Jason Stanislous S/o Manish Robert Stanislous, Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Nagpur Medical Square, 169 Quarter Ayodhya Nagar, P.S. Emambada, Nagpur District -Nagpur , Maharashtra (Correctly Mentioned 2 - Pradeep Yadav S/o Yogesh Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o House No 412/2, Ward No 10durga Chowk Shankar Nagar Durg P. S. Mohan Nagar Durg District Durg ( C. G.) ( Correctly Mentioned ) --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station Bhatapara City District Balodabazar -Bhatapara --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 2404 of 2026 1 - Manish Patil S/o Purushottam Patil Aged About 30 Years R/o Dhamangaon, Railway Dattapur, Nearby Budh Bihar, Ward No. 09, Police Station Dattapur, District Amrawati (Maharastra) 2 - Ahsan Ali S/o Mohammad Javed Aged About 21 Years R/o Ali Nagar, Gopiganj, Police Station Rajkiy Bhadohi (U.P.) 3 - Mohd. Faizan S/o Samirullah Khan Aged About 28 Years R/o Santara Market, Nearby Krishna Talkies, Bajariya, Police Station Ganeshpet, District Nagpur (Maharastra) (Description Of The Applicants Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 2 --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 2410 of 2026 1 - Gourav Pandey S/o Santosh Pandey Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Lalgaon, Tahsil Sirmour, Police Station Garh, District Rewa (M.P.) 2 - Kapil Hablani S/o Sunil Hablani Aged About 19 Years R/o Bangali Colony, Sant Kanwar Ram Ward, Bhatapara, Police Station Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 3 - Sourabh Shukla S/o Omprakash Shukla Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 20, Vaishali Nagar Bhilai, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) (Description Of The Applicants Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 2297 of 2026 1 - Deepak Dhirwani S/o Govind Ram Dhirwani Aged About 43 Years R/o Kashmiri Gali, Plot No. 635, Nearby Tribhuj Garden, Police Station- Panch Pawali Nagpur, District- Nagpur (Maharashtra) (Description Of Applicant Mentioned As Per Charge Sheet) --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 2280 of 2026 1 - Ajaj Sheikh S/o Fayaz Gulab Sheikh Aged About 27 Years R/o 253, North Sadar Bazar Lashkar Sholapur, Police Station Sadar Bazar Maharastra 2 - Furkan Ahmad S/o Ahmad Jasimuddin Ansari Aged About 20 Years R/o Dhamangaon, Dhamangaon Railway Station, District Amrawali Maharastra --- Applicant(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Anil Gulati and Shri Ankit Singh, Advocates. For Respondent : Shri Ghanshyam Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate along with Shri Vikhyat Arora, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 23.03.2026 3 1. Since all these bail applications arise out of same crime number and same incident, they are being heard and decided together by this common order. 2. These are first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicants who are in jail since 09.07.2025, 25.07.2025, 08.05.2025 and 09.05.2025 respectively in connection with Crime No.288/2025 registered at Police Station Bhatapara (City), District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4),319(2),336(2),336(3),338,340(2),238,111 of BNS and Section 42(2) Telecommunication Act and Section 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 05-05-2025, the police of Police Station Bhatapara (City) received a secret information that a person is engaged in playing online gambling through his mobile phone near State Bank of India and betting in the IPL Cricket Match. The police conducted a raid and caught the co-accused Gourav Hablani, who was actively involved in online gambling. He was interrogated and he disclosed that he used Allpanelexch.app, the goexch09.com platform for betting in the IPC 20-20-Cricket match through his mobile No. 7224090781 and obtained online login password of Mc123456 and ID KLSGOI. He also disclosed that his brother Kapil Hablani, mobile No. 8421478285 and his friend Deepak Sablani, mobile No 7723008660, have also engaged in online gambling for a long time and residing at Vasco (South Goa) and using the betting platform of RBC139, Kheloyaar 164, Win Bu. The online betting platform Allpanelexch.app and goexch09.com were also provided to Gourav Hablani by Kapil 4 Hablani and Deepak Sablani. From memorandum statement of these accused persons, the name of other accused persons were disclosed who were also actively involved in the online gambling. From the memorandum statement of Aman Dewangan, the name of present applciant were disclosed that he too was involved in online gambling along with other accused persons. The present applicant was arrested on 08.05.2025 and one mobile phone was seized from him. 4. Learned counsel for the respective applicants would submit that except memorandum statement of co-accused Gaurav Hablani and Aman Dewangan, there is no other evidence against the applicants which directly connect them with the offence in question. The said memorandum is inadmissible in evidence. Except mobile phones or electronic gadgets like laptop or I-pad, no other incriminating articles were seized from them to implicate them in the offence in question. There is no material extracted from their electronic gadgets through which their engagement in the alleged offence of online gambling is reflecting. There is no document with respect to any bank transaction with other accused persons. They would further submit that other two accused persons Gaurav Hablani and Deepak Sablani have been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 09.02.2026 in SLP (Crl.) No. 20121/2025 and order dated 28.01.2026 passed in Criminal Appeal No.478 of 2026. The allegation against the present applicants are also similar to the allegations against those co- accused, therefore, the present applicants may also be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime. They would also submit that there is no other criminal antecedent against the applicants. 5 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the respective applicants and submit that there are sufficient evidence against the applicants that they with association of other co-accused persons engaged in playing online gambling. Though their name appears in the memorandum statement of other co-accused persons, however, based on the memorandum statement of other co-accused persons as well as their own memorandum statements, number of mobile phones, laptop, tablets, passbooks and ATM cards have been seized. From the accused Girish Dhirwani one mobile phone, from Deepak Dhirwani two mobile phone, from Ajaj Sheikh six mobile phones and one charger, from Furkan Ahmed three mobile phones and one laptop, from Manish Patil four mobile phones and one tablet, from Ahsan Ali three mobiles phones, two charger, three Sim Cards, one passbook of Maharashtra Bank which was in the name of account holder Rubina Mohd, from accused Mohd. Faizan one mobile phone, one camera, one charger, ten Sim Cards, two ATM cards and one Rupee Card, from accused Gourav Pandey four mobile phones, one laptop, four passbook and one note book, from Kapil Hablani two mobile phone and one charger, from accused Sourav Shukla, three mobile phone, one Router, three mobile charger, one 360 degree rooted camera, two ATM Cards of Bank of Maharashtra, one JIO Sim card, one note book, one passbook of India Overseas Bank in the name of account holder Akash Pandey and one passbook of Karntaka Bank in the name of account holder Vishnu, from accused Jason Stanislous three mobile phones, five Sim Cards, one charger, two notebook of Mule amount 6 and from accused Pradeep Yadav three mobile phones, nine Sim cards, one tablet, three Debit Cards and one Camera have been seized. He would further submit that from the memorandum statement of accused persons they disclosed their involvement in the offence in question and their syndicate. During investigation the entire network and manner in which they organized the crime were disclosed. Looking to the seriousness of the offence and their network through the country, they are not entitled for bail. Further, the allegation against co-accused Gaurav Hablani and Deepak Sablani are different than the allegation against the present applicants and even after releasing them on bail by the Supreme Court, the second bail application of co- accused Aman Dewangan has been rejected by this court vide order dated 16.02.2026 in MCrC No.1609 of 2026 and therefore the applicants are not entitled for bail. 6. I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the application and case diary. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material available against the applicants in the charge sheet, prima facie evidence with respect to their involvement in the offence in question and their syndicate to engage online gambling throughout the country, active participation in their association and syndicate with the other accused persons, further considering the rejection of first bail application of Anurag Tiwari in MCrC No.2045 of 2026 on 09.03.2026 including rejection of second bail application of co-accused Aman Dewangan on 16.02.2026 in MCrC No.1609 of 2026 and also in view 7 of material available against all the accused persons in the charge sheet, this court is not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 8. Accordingly, all these bail applications filed by the aforesaid applicants for grant of bail are hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder</div>