RAJESH H. SHUKLA, J.

1. Rule. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties waive service of notice of Rule.

2. Since the issue involved in the present group of petitions is common, all these matters are heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. The present group of petitions are filed by the petitioners under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India as well as under the provision of the Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the Gambling Act") for the prayers as prayed for inter alia that appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued for quashing and setting aside the order dated 15th March, 2017 and also for declaration that game of poker is a game of skill and not a game of chance and, therefore, covered under the exception carved out by Section 13 of the Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 on the grounds stated in the memo of petition.

4. Heard learned Senior Counsel, Shri Mihir Thakore appearing with learned advocate, Shri Vishal Patel with learned advocate, Ms.Garima Malhotra for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Ms. Nisha Thakore for the respondents in Special Civil Application No. 6903 of 2017, learned Counsel, Shri I.H. Syed appearing with learned advocate, Shri Nachiket Dave for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Ms.Nisha Thakore for the respondents in Special Civil Application No. 9772 of 2017, learned Senior Counsel, Shri S.V. Raju as well as learned Senior Counsel, Shri S.I. Nanavati appearing with learned advocate, Shri Maulin Pandya for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya for the respondents in Special Civil Application No.11174/11175 of 2017, learned AGP Ms. Jyoti Bhatt in Special Civil Application No. 11176-11177 of 2017 and learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya in Special Civil Application No. 11178-11179 of 2017, learned Senior Counsel, Shri Mihir Thakore appearing with learned advocate, Shri Tarak Damani for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms.Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya for the respondents in Special Civil Application No.12596 of 2017, learned advocate, Shri A.N. Patel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya for the respondents in Special Civil Application No.12653 of 2017, learned advocate, Shri Siddhartha Dave for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Ms.Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya for the respondents in Special Civil Application No.5330 of 2017 and learned advocate, Shri S.D. Motwani for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manish Shah appearing with learned AGP Shri Bhargav Pandya for the respondents in Special Civil Application No.10935 of 2017.

5. Learned Senior Counsel, Shri Mihir Thakore referred to the background of the facts and submitted that for Section 13 of the Gambling Act, identical wordings have been interpreted by the Hon'ble Apex Court. He submitted that therefore once it is shown that poker is a game of skill, Gambling Act would not be attracted. Learned Senior Counsel, Shri Mihir Thakore referred to Section 13 of the Gambling Act and submitted that it provides for exception and, therefore, the Court is required to examine as to whether the poker can be said to be a game of skill or game of chance. Learned Senior Counsel, Shri Mihir Thakore submitted that there is always an element of chance. He submitted that if the interpretation of the State is accepted then, there could be a no game played as even in the game of skill, element of chance would be there. In support of his submissions, he has referred to and relied upon the judgment in case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. K. Satynarayana, reported in AIR 1968 SC 825. He referred to the observations