IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11589 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. MANJUNATHA A S/O. A.V.AKKAL REDDY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. 9H CROSS, KHB COLONY, CHITRADURGA TOWN- 577 501

2. KENCHAPPA S/O. CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

R/O. 9 CROSS, IUDP LAYOUT, CHITRADURGA TOWN- 577 501.

3. KASHINATHA K M S/O. KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.

R/O. NEHRU NAGAR, 4TH CROSS, Digitally signed by CHITRADURGA TOWN- 577 501.

SHARADAVANI B Location: High 4. JAGADEESH Court of Karnataka S/O. NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. 4TH CROSS, JOGHIMATTI ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN-577501

5. PRASAD V.S.

S/O. VASUDEVACHARI AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.

R/O. 9TH CROSS, KHB COLONY, 3RD STAGE, IUDP LAYOUT, CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577501.

6. SITHA RAMA REDDY A.

S/O. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS.

R/O. NEAR BASAPPA HOSPITAL, CHANNAPPA LAYOUT, KELAGOTE, CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577501.

7. BALAKRISHNA C.N.

S/O. NARYANA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.

R/O. NEAR SURYAPUTRA CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577501.

8. CHANDRA NAIK S/O. LAKSHMAN NAIK, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.

R/O. PWD QUARTERS, JCR, CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577501.

9. DELIP @ MANJUNATHA S/O. RANGANATHA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS.

R/O. GOPALPURA ROAD, 2ND CROSS, CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577501.

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S G RAJENDRA REDDY., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EXTENSION POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA REPTD. BY ITS S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.315/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND C.J.M COURT CHITRADURGA ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.25/2024 OF EXTENSION P.S. CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 79 AND 80 OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for respondent.

2. The essence of the prosecution’s allegation is that the petitioner was allegedly found engaged in playing the game of “andar-bahar” within the confines of his residence. On the basis of this allegation, a criminal case was registered, and the Investigating Officer, being of the opinion that the petitioner had committed a cognizable offence, proceeded to file a charge sheet in C.C.

No.315/2025.

3. The question as to whether a citizen found participating in a game of chance, specifically “andar- bahar,” constitutes a punishable offence has already been examined and adjudicated by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.2227/2024. In that judgment, the Court considered the scope and applicability of the relevant statutory provisions in the context of games of chance played in private or public spaces. It is apposite to reproduce paragraph 3 of the said judgment, which also refers to an earlier decision rendered in Crl.P. No.100877/2014, for a proper understanding of the legal position, as follows:

"The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue in the case at hand stands covered by the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.100877/2014, disposed on 13.06.2014, which read as follows:

5. On analysing the above said provision of law, this Court has rendered a decision reported in 1971(2) Mys. L.J. 187 in the case of Chickarangappa & Others Vs. State of Mysore and another decision reported in 1977 (1) K.L.J. 274 in the case of Eranna Vs. State of Karnataka, which decisions declare that, "playing 'Andar Bahar' is a game of skill and not mere a game of chance and therefore, the offence punishable under Section 79 and 80 of the Act are not attracted". 6. In the ruling reported in 1977 (1) K.L.J. 274 (supra), this Court has categorically held that, game of 'Andar Bahar' is not a game of chance. The facts are also little bit relevant as quoted in the said c