IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Aman Chaudhary, J.
Saurabh Verma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M-22028-2022
Decided On : 30-11-2022
Public Gambling Act - Non-Cognizable Offence - Section 13-A - Section 5 - Section 155 Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was alleged to have been involved in betting on cricket matches and was found in possession of a large sum of money. The trial Court dismissed the application for discharge and framed charges under Section 13-A of the Public Gambling Act. The petitioner challenged the legality of the investigation and raid conducted by the ASI.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the investigation in a non-cognizable offence at the hands of the police without permission of the competent Magistrate is impermissible. The procedural irregularity in the raid and investigation vitiated the proceedings initiated against the petitioner.
Issues: The key issues were the legality of the investigation and raid conducted by the ASI, and whether the offence alleged was non-cognizable.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the provisions of Section 5 and Section 155 Cr.P.C. and the definition of non-cognizable offence to conclude that the investigation in a non-cognizable offence without permission of the competent Magistrate is impermissible.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and FIR No. 98 dated 25.7.2020 and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.
JUDGMENT
Aman Chaudhary, J. - Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No.98, dated 25.07.2020, registered under Section 13-A of the Public Gambling Act, 1867 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'), registered at Police Station Division No.2, Jalandhar, Annexure P-1, charge-sheet dated 06.08.2020, Annexure P-3, order dated 18.04.2022, Annexure P-5 passed by the trial Court dismissing an application filed for discharge, framing of charge dated 18.04.2022, Annexure P-6 and charge-sheet dated 18.04.2022, Annexure P-7.
2. Pithily put, the prosecution version is that during a private vehicle patrolling to check bad elements, the ASI who was present at the workshop chowk received a secret information that the petitioner, a resident of BSF Colony, Jalandhar, has been doing betting on cricket matches from the last few years and has kept heavy amount earned from the same. On that day also he was doing betting on the cricket test match between West Indies and England while sitting at his house, who can be nabbed with laptop, mobile phone and with heavy amount of Indian currency. The said ASI with police officials raided the house of the petitioner at 9.40 pm on 25.7.2020 and recovered an amount of Rs.1,23,50,000/- alleged to be gambling money from his possession alongwith laptop and mobile phone. The amount recovered was deposited with the Income Tax Department. Final report in the case was presented on 30.7.2020.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the application for discharge was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 18.04.2022 on the ground that at the time of framing of the charges only prima facie case is to be seen. Thereafter, the charges against the petitioner were framed vide order dated 18.4.2022, Annexure P-7, under Section 13-A of The Public Gambling Act (hereinafter referred to as 'The Act').
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner opened up his arguments by making a reference to Schedule 2 of the Cr.P.C. wherein the classification of the offences against other laws in the Cr.P.C., are mentioned, as per which the offences punishable with imprisonment for less than 3 years are non-cognizable, bailable and triable by Magistrate.
5. Learned counsel in order to further substantiate his stance of challenge drew the attention of this Court to Sub Section 2 of Section 155 Cr.P.C. which reads thus:-
'155. Information as to non- cognizable cases and investigation of such cases.
(1)When information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission within the limits of such station of a non- cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf, and refer the informant to the Magistrate.(2)No police officer shall investigate a non- cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner next contended that the offence punishable under Section 13-A of the Act under which the FIR was lodged and charges had been framed is non-cognizable as the prescribed imprisonment for it is upto one month or fine of Rs.50/-. Reference to the Section was made, which reads thus:-
'13. Gaming and setting birds and animals to fight in public streets.-A police officer may apprehend without warrant- any person found playing for money or other valuable thing, with cards, dice, counters or other instruments of gaming, used in playing any game not being a game of mere skill, in any public street, place or thoroughfare situated within the limits aforesaid, or any person setting any birds or animals to fight in any public street, place or thoroughfare situated within the limits aforesaid, or any person there present aiding and abetting such public fighting of birds and animals. Such person when apprehended shall be brought without delay before a Magistrate,
The investigation in a non-cognizable offence at the hands of the police without permission of the competent Magistrate is impermissible.
The court affirmed that offences under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act are cognizable, allowing police to conduct investigations without a magistrate's prior permission, contrasting them with n....
The court established that licensed bookies must adhere to the terms of their licenses, and allegations of illegal betting and tax evasion can lead to criminal liability under the Karnataka Police Ac....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the authority to quash an FIR if the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence or make out a case against the accused....
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.
Illegality in investigation goes to root of matter.
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.
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.