The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against Hitesh Kumar Tarwani in a case concerning alleged illegal IPL betting activities, holding that the material collected during investigation required examination by the Trial Court.
Justice Himanshu Joshi passed the order on August 11, 2026, dismissing Tarwani’s petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
Background of the Case
The case arose from an FIR registered at Madan Mahal Police Station, Jabalpur, in connection with alleged betting operations. The FIR invoked Section 4(a) of the Public Gambling Act along with Sections 109, 112, 114, 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
According to the prosecution, police conducted a raid at the residence of co-accused persons on April 23, 2022, following information about alleged illegal IPL betting. Mobile phones, registers, a calculator, television equipment and cash were seized.
A subsequent raid at RK Tower in Jabalpur led to the recovery of Rs.21,55,600, cheque books, company seals, loan records, property documents, mobile phones and other material. The investigation allegedly indicated the use of several shell companies for routing betting-related funds.
Petitioner’s Argument
Tarwani argued that his implication was primarily based on memorandum statements of co-accused persons. He submitted that there was no recovery from him and no independent documentary, electronic or financial material connecting him with the alleged activities.
His counsel also relied on an earlier High Court order in favour of co-accused Sanjay Sanpal, arguing that the allegations and material were substantially similar and that he should receive the benefit of parity.
State’s Opposition
The State opposed the plea, maintaining that the investigation had collected material indicating Tarwani’s alleged connection with the wider betting operation and financial transactions.
It argued that the charge-sheet disclosed prima facie material and that the disputed factual issues should be examined during trial rather than in proceedings seeking quashing of the FIR.
Court’s Observation
The High Court noted that the FIR, charge-sheet and accompanying documents contained material concerning the alleged betting operations, cash seizures, company documents and other articles.
The Court observed that questions about whether Tarwani was actually involved, whether the prosecution evidence would ultimately be sufficient, and whether his defence was acceptable were matters for the Trial Court.
On the plea of parity, Justice Joshi held that such relief could not be applied mechanically. The Court noted that the earlier order concerning Sanjay Sanpal was based on the facts and material relating specifically to that accused. Tarwani had not shown that the material against him was identical in every respect.
Decision
The High Court held that the allegations and material reflected in the charge-sheet could not be considered so absurd or inherently improbable as to justify interference under Section 528 BNSS.
The Court stated that the petitioner’s contentions were matters of defence that could appropriately be raised before the Trial Court.
Accordingly, Justice Himanshu Joshi concluded that no case was made out for exercising the High Court’s inherent powers and dismissed the petition.
