IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
Mr. Abhishek Naik, S/o. Sri Chandrakanth Nayaka – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Through Station House Officer, Chitradurga Extension Police Station Represented By State Public Prosecutor and Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 8557 of 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
Decided On : 25-06-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context of the fir and allegations. (Para 3) |
| 2. arguments of the petitioner questioning the nature of the game. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's view on the petitioner's involvement. (Para 6 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. criteria distinguishing games of skill and chance. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
(S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.)
In this petition, petitioners seeks the following relief :
"a. Quash the FIR bearing No.35/2025 the information dated 19.03.2025 registered with the respondent No.1 Chitradurga Extension Police Station wherein the Petitioners herein are arraigned as accused for the alleged offence under Sections 79 , 80 of the KARNATAKA POLICE ACT and Section 112 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (annexed vide Annexure-A and A1) pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM Court, Chitradurga District.
b. Pass any order/s as deems fit to this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice.”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondents and perused the materials on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate on 19.03.2025, respondent No.1 upon receiving a credible information from respondent No.2 that certain persons were indulging in act of gambling/game of chance, respondent No.1- Police registered the FIR in Crime No.35/2025 against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of the KARNATAKA POLICE ACT and Section 112 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), which is assailed in the present petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would reiterate the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record submits that the petitioner herein is only the Vice President of M/s. Power Recreation House where the raid was conducted and the alleged offence is said to have committed. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no averments made in the complaint as to the nature of the game and has not stated as to whether such game is a ‘Game of Chance’ or a ‘Game of Skill’ and hence, the petitioner could not be incriminated for the aforesaid offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the KARNATAKA POLICE ACT as held by this Court in the following judgments:
(i) Sri Manjunath E and others vs. State of Karnataka - Crl.P.No.8396/2017;
(ii) M/s. Legends Culture Association (R) and another vs. State of Karnataka - Crl.P.No.8981/2024.
It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned proceedings deserves to be quashed.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
6. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner is only the Vice President of M/s. Power Recreation House wherein the alleged offence is said to have committed. This being the case, the petitioner herein could not be incriminated in the said offences.
7. Further, in relation to offences punishable in respect of 'Game of Chance' and 'Game of Skill', this Court held as under:
(i) Sri Manjunath E's case supra:
"The petitioners have called in question the proceedings pending before the MMTC, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.20386/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 79 & 80 of the KARNATAKA POLICE ACT .
2. A strong legal point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the entire proceedings is hit by Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., as the Respondent- Police have not taken any permission from the Magistrate to investigate the matter and to file a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the Court. He contended that, even the entire charge sheet is translated into evidence, there is no material to show that the Game played by the accused ie., ‘Fantastic Three Dice Bowling’ is a game of chance or it is a game of skill, that fact is not mentioned in the complaint nor it has been explained as to how the game being played by the accused and it is only a game of chance.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of this court reported in Criminal
Games of skill cannot be prosecuted under laws applicable to games of chance due to lack of evidence establishing the nature of the game involved.
A game classified as skill-based does not constitute an offence under Section 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, thus allowing for the quashing of related FIRs.
Games classified as skill-based do not fall under the jurisdiction of Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act concerning games of chance.
The game of Andar Bahar is classified as a game of skill, not chance, leading to the quashing of FIR under the Karnataka Police Act and BNS Act due to lack of substantiation.
The court reaffirmed that Andar Bahar is legally recognized as a game of skill, and without evidence proving it as a game of chance, prosecution under relevant gaming laws is not sustainable.
The court affirmed that Andar Bahar is a game of skill and not a game of chance, necessitating clear proof of game nature for legal charges under relevant statutes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.