Rummy is not a game of mere skill and therefore does not fall within the exemption under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Gaming Act, 1930.

( 1 ) ON 2/06/1963 the Assistant Superintendent of Police, Vizianagaram, on receiving information that the house bearing No 15-5-9/3 in Temple Street in Vizianagaram was being run as a common gaming-house, ostensibly under the name and style of Brothers Union Recreation Club", raided the premises. He look with him two mediators and Sub-Inspector of Police and when the party entered the premises they found seven persons sitting round a table, playing a card game known as "rummy" with plastic chips evidently convertible into money value. The Assistant Superintendent of Police interrogated the gamblers and seized the playing cards, the chips and an amount of Rs. 1-67 np. He then searched the adjoining portion of the same premises, which was occupied by Chepuri Venkata Varaha Narasimhulu alias Baburao. That person was stated to be the Secretary of the Club and was apparently running the common gaming-house. On a search of his room, a sum of Rs 1230-67 Np. in cash besides three sets of old card packs and seventeen sets of new card packs and a large number of plastic chips which could be used as tokens, were recovered under a "mahasaruama. "

( 2 ) AFTER completing the investigation, prosecution was launched against Chepuri Venkata Varaha Narasimhulu anas Baburao, the keeper of the gaming-house, and the seven persons who were found gaming inside those premises. The case against the former was tried by the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram, as C. C. No. 1981 of 1963 and the accused was convicted under Section 8 of the Madras Gaming Act, 1930 (now called the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Gaming Act) which will be referred to hereinafter as "the Act. " He was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25. 00. and the chips and playing cards were ordered to be destroyed while the money amounting to Rs. 1230-67 np. found in his room was ordered to be forfeited to the State under Section 10 of the Act,

( 3 ) THE seven persons who were playing "rummy," were tried in C. C. No. 1982 of 1963 and were convicted under Section 9 of the Act, for having been found gaming in a common gaming-house, and each was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25. The playing cards and chips were ordered to be destroyed, while the seized articles were ordered to be forfeited.

( 4 ) THE accused in the two cases preferred appeals to the Sessions Court, Visakhapatnam, and the Additional Sessions Judge who heard the appeals, confirmed the convictions and sentences and dismissed the appeals.

( 5 ) AGAINST the Judgments of the Additional Sessions Judge. Chepuri Venkata Varaha Narasimhulu alias Baburao preferred Criminal Revision Case No. 696 of 1964 while the seven others filed Criminal Revision Case No. 697 of 1964.

( 6 ) WHEN these two revision cases came up before Mohamed Mirza J. , he made the following order: In both these revisions, a common question is raised whether the game of rummy is a game of chance. In a decision of this Court in Cr. R. C. No. 71/62 Sharfuddin Ahmed J. observed that the game of rummy is a game of chance. With this view, I do not agree. Therefore I refer these cases to a Bench.

( 7 ) THAT is how these cases have come up before us. Apparently it was contended before Moliamed Mirza J. that notwithstanding the proved facts that the premises in question satisfied the definition of a "common gaming-house within the meaning of Section 3 of the Act; that Chepurj Venkata Varaha Narasimhulu alias Babu Rao had kept the common gaming house for his profit within the meaning of Section 8 of the Act, and that the seven persons who were present there, were found gaming in a common gaming-house within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act, the accused were not liable to be punished under either of those sections because the card game of "rummy" which was being played, came within the exception envisaged by Section 11 of the Act. That section which has the marginal note "saving of games of skill" reads thus; "nothing in Sections 5 to 10 of this Act sha