B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the proceedings in Cr. No. 406/97 of P. S. , Machavaram, Vijayawada City (On the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada ).

( 2 ) PETITIONER Nos. 2 to 52 are the accused in the said crime. The allegations levelled against them, may briefly, be noticed. hi the charge-sheet it is alleged that Petitioner Nos. 2 to 49, who are Al to A-48 are the residents of Vijayawada and they are landlords and business people in Vijayawada City. It is also stated that all of them are Members and guests of the Executive Club, Vijaj-awada, first petitioner herein; whereas petitioner Nos. 50 to 52 arc working as Cashiers in the card rooms of the first petitioner-Club.

( 3 ) ON 13-9-1997 at about 9-30 P. M. , the ACP-I and ACP-II along with other officers and mediators, on receipt of credible information, proceeded to the first petitioner-Club and raided the card rooms in the presence of the mediators and found that petitioner Nos. 2 to 49 herein were found playing thirteen cards by betting high stakes in the card rooms of the club. It is specifically stated that on seeing the police, all of them thrown away the cards in the centre of the table in Pel-mel and they were sitting quitely. All of them were arrested in the presence of the mediators and cash and tokens found on the table were seized. It is alleged that the police have also noticed the tokens, which were kept in heap in front of each member and the cards found in pel-mel in the centre of the tables. A panchanama was prepared. The Police have also seized the Cash Registers, which were maintained by petitioner Nos. 50 to 52 in the premises of the first petitioner-Club. It is the case of the police that A-49 toa-51 (Petitioner Nos. 49 to 52) were collecting amounts for the maintenance, from the players.

( 4 ) IT is stated that during the course of investigation, the Inspector of Police, CCRB, Vijayawada, released A-l to A-48 (Petitioner Nos. 2 to 49) as they offered sufficient sureties. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. A49 to 51 (Petitioner Nos. 50 to 52) were also arrested and released on bail.

( 5 ) IT is the specific case of the police that the Petitioner Nos. 2 to 49 (A-l to A-48) are liable for punishment under Section 4 of the A. P. Gaming Act, 1974 (for short the Act ) and petitioner Nos. 50 to 52 (A-49 to A-51) are liable for punishment under Section 3 of the Act, as they were running card room, collecting amounts for the maintenance of the card room. Even according to the charge-sheet, petitioner Nos. 2 to 49 were found playing thirteen cards in the card room by betting money.

( 6 ) IN this application, Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the FIR, itself, ex facie discloses that petitioner Nos. 2 to 49 were found playing the game of thirteen cards, which is known as rummy and the said game does not attract Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. It is contended that Rummy is a game of skill and Section 15 of the Act clearly excludes such game from the purview of the provisions of the Act. It is urged by the learned Counsel that even if all the allegations levelled against the petitioners in the complaint and the charge sheet are taken to be true, on their face value, no offence as such could be attributed as against the petitioners. It is further urged by the learned Counsel that there is no other allegation against the petitioners, except that they were playing the game of thirteen cards. According to the learned Counsel, the police have deliberately failed to describe the game as rummy , as such description would take away the jurisdiction of the police to register a crime.

( 7 ) IT is clear from the material available on record that petitioner Nos. 2 to 49 were playing the game of rummy with thirteen cards, though the police did not characterise the game as Rummy. It is not the case of the police

Click Here to Read the rest of this document