Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 4000
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA, J
Manohar – Appellant
Versus
State Of M.P. – Respondent
CRR 887/2006
Arun Pateriya,Brijesh Sharma,Keshav Pathak,Advocate General
The prosecution failed to establish credible evidence for the conviction under the Public Gambling Act, leading to the applicant's acquittal.
Headnote:(A) Public Gambling Act - Section 4-A - Criminal revision against conviction and sentence for gambling - The applicant was convicted and sentenced to one month rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.200/- for gambling activities, which was upheld by the appellate court - The prosecution's case was based on a raid where the applicant was allegedly found with gambling chits and cash. (Paras 1, 2, 3, 11, 13)
(B) Evidence - Burden of proof - The prosecution failed to provide independent corroboration for the allegations against the applicant, and discrepancies in the evidence were noted, including the improper documentation of the crime number and lack of credible witness support. (Paras 6, 8, 12)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested during a police raid for allegedly engaging in gambling activities, with cash and gambling chits seized from him. The prosecution's case was challenged on grounds of lack of evidence and procedural discrepancies.
Findings of Court:
The court found the prosecution's evidence unreliable and the conviction unsustainable due to lack of corroboration and procedural irregularities.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the prosecution's evidence, the procedural discrepancies in the documentation, and the lack of independent witness support.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's failure to provide credible evidence and the presence of significant discrepancies in the documentation led to the conclusion that the conviction could not be upheld.
Result: The conviction and sentence were set aside, and the applicant was acquitted.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arrest during gambling raid (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. prosecution story challenged (Para 3) |
| 3. discrepancies in evidence (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. lack of connection to crime (Para 9) |
| 5. no admission of guilt (Para 11) |
| 6. lack of independent corroboration (Para 12) |
| 7. conviction set aside (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. return of seized items (Para 15) |
ORDER
This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment passed on24.5.2006 by Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur, in Criminal Appeal No.80/2005. By this judgment, the appeal preferred by applicant against his conviction and sentence passed in Criminal Case No.323/2005 on 28.6.2005 by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhatarpur, for holding him guilty for the offence of 4-A of Public Gambling Act and sentencing him to one month rigorous imprisonment, fine of Rs.200/- with a default clause to undergo ten days imprisonment and confiscation of Rs.14,500/- was dismissed and his conviction as well as sentence were upheld.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the Thana Prabhari of Police Station Civil Lines, Chhatarpur, raided the spot upon receiving the information of "satta" being played there and in this raid applicant was nabbed with "satta" chits; there were numbers written on those chits; a mobile phone and an amount of Rs.14,500/- received for "satta" booking were recovered upon the search of applicant; he was arrested on spot and on return to the police station, a crime was registered at Crime No.269/2004. The charge-sheet was filed after the investigation was complete and upon conclusion of trial applicant was convicted under Section 4-A of Public Gambling Act and was sentenced. Appeal filed against it was dismissed by the impugned judgment.
3. The grounds raised in this criminal revision are that the prosecution story is a total farce; applicant was never found in possession of any "satta parchi" or any item related to that offence; he was forced by police to sign some documents; the prosecution story was not supported by independent witnesses; seizure memo and other documents disclose that the crime number was written thereon while it was registered later. The courts below failed to appreciate this material discrepancy. Further, not a single witness supported the prosecution case while the place of incident was a busy market having sufficient crowd and still no one came forward to support the prosecution story. There were material contradictions in the evidence submitted by the prosecution. Therefore, it is prayed that this criminal revision be allowed and the applicant be acquitted in the matter.
4. State has opposed this criminal revision on the ground that there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned judgment.
5. Arguments of both the parties have been heard and records of both the courts below have been perused.
6. The FIR registered in this case is marked as Ex.P-4, which suggests that upon information received from the informant, Thana Prabhari of Police Station Civil Lines, Chhatarpur, namely Tehzeeb Qazi, left for the designated spot along with police force after making entry in the Rojnamcha Sanha. It is interesting to note that the entry made in Rojnamcha Sanha has not been produced in evidence, while that would have been a relevant document. FIR further reveals that the information was that applicant was making the people to bet upon numbers by booking their money and for this, he was using "satta" chits. The statements of Harprasad Awasthy (P.W.2), Hariram (P.W.3) and Tehzeeb Qazi (P.W.4) reveal that when they reached the spot, no other person was found that would be involved in betting.
7. According to FIR, the applicant was nabbed when he tried to run away on seeing the police party and from his possession, a mobile phone, a dot pen, an amount of Rs.14,500/- and a "satta" chit were seized. Ex.P-1 is the seizure memo that was prepared on the date of incident i.e. 2.9.2004 at 10:00 p.m. Significantly, the FIR of this case was registered on 2.9.2004 at
