Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/8786/2026 of KAPOORCHAND VERMA Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 20 September 2026
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8786 of 2026 1 - Kapoorchand Verma Son Of Ramdayal Verma Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Village Baiharsari, Police Chowki Pondi Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through
CGHC010351292026
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8786 of 2026
1 - Kapoorchand Verma Son Of Ramdayal Verma Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Village Baiharsari, Police Chowki Pondi Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham
(C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Chowki Pondi Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Applicant (s)
:
Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate
For Respondent(s)
:
Ms. Isha Jajodia, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Order on board
21.09.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard.
2. The present is a second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the application has been dismissed vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6114/2026.
3. The applicant, who has been arrested on 09.06.2026 in connection with Crime No. 57/2026, registered at P.S. Bodla, Outpost Pondi, District- Kabirdham, for the offence under Section 6 and 7 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022 is claiming regular bail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is in jail since 09.06.2026. The investigation has been completed, trial has been started and out of 11 witnesses, 3 witnesses has already been examined but none of them have stated anything against the appellant. Final adjudication of the case will take its own time, considering the nature of offence, he may be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and have submitted that the first bail application of the applicant has already been dismissed on merit and there is no change in circumstances, therefore, the second bail application of the applicant may be rejected.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail applicant.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation, further considering that the first bail application of the applicant has already been rejected on merits vide order dated 20.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6114/2026 and also that the applicant is having two criminal antecedents of two similar nature of offence and further that the trial of the case has already been started and out of 11 witnesses, 3 witnesses have already been examined, I am not inclined to admit the second bail application of the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the second bail application filed by the applicant is hereby dismissed at motion stage.
Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge
Sagrika