This compliant alleges the willful violation of the

order dated 04.05.2023 passed by the learned Single

Judge in W.P.No.9571/2023 in terms of a order rendered

in an identical case namely, W.P.No.11521/2019 and

accordingly same was accorded to the complainant.

Learned counsel for the complainant argues that the

respondent-accused have willfully disobeyed the said order

and therefore, they are liable to be tried for the offence of

the contempt of this court, as provided under Sections 11

and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. He hastened

to add that there is absolutely no justification for the

accused persons to flout the mandate of the court.

After service of notice, the accused persons

have entered appearance through the learned Additional

Government Advocate who resists the complaint repelling

the version of the complainant. All the accused have got

filed a compliance affidavit sworn to by accused No.4-

Mr.K.C.Giri where in paras 7, 8 and 9 read as under:-

- 4 -

"7. I further state that Upparpet Sub

Inspector-Ravi A had received the similar

information on 06.16.2023 and pursuant there

to the said PSI obtained the permission from

the Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court-5),

Bengaluru and upon obtaining the permission

he has filed the FIR bearing No.181/2023

dated 16.06.2023 and pursuant their to he

visited the Complainant club and enquired with

the members about their activities. However,

the said PSI did not found any incriminate

material and therefore, he has filed the B-

report to the Court. The copy of the B-Report

is herewith produced as Annexure-R2.

8. I further state that none of the

Accused Police have visited the Complainants

premises without any reason and harassed

them. The Visit of the Accused Police to the

Complainant's

premises

was

within

the

purview of the orders passed by the Hon'ble

High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition

No.11521/2019 and Accused Police have not

violated the said order of this Hon'ble Court.

9. It is respectfully submitted that the

action taken by the Accused Police is strictly in

accordance with law and it is strictly in

compliance with the Order passed by this

Hon'ble Court. The Accused Police at no point

of time, have violated any law. The action of

the Police is in the usual course of the Police

duty to ensure that no unlawful activities are

being done within the complainant's club. "

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and having perused the complaint papers and also the

- 5 -

compliance affidavit, we are of the considered opinion that

there is no any willful disobedience of the order of the

learned Single Judge. It hardly needs to be said that from

the days of R.M.D.Chamarbaugwalla vs. Union of India,

AIR 1957 SC 628 and State of Bombay vs. R.M.D.

Chamarbaugwala, AIR 1957 SC 699, the difference is

maintained between gaming activity and gambling activity.

The rights of the citizens are protected only in respect of

the former and that the later activities constitute criminal

offences in the light of the provisions of the Karnataka

Police Act, 1963. This view gains support from a Division

Bench decision to which one of us (KSDJ) is a party in All

India Gaming Federation vs State of Karnataka reported in

2022 SCC OnLine Kar 435. The standard reflected in the

subject paragraphs of the compliance affidavit is in accord

with both these decisions. We see absolutely no substance

in the allegation of disobedience, much less willful

disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge, in

question.

- 6 -

In the above circumstances, this complaint of

contempt is disposed off and notice is discharged. Costs

made easy.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Snb/

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41