TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court rules rummy with stakes as gambling, upholds police raids on suspected gaming houses.</h1> The court determined that playing rummy with stakes at the respondent-Mahalakshmi Cultural Association constituted gambling, not a game of skill. It ... - Issues Involved:1. Legality of playing rummy with stakes.2. Police authority to raid and take action against the Association.3. Definition and implications of 'common gaming house' and 'gaming'.4. Rights of the Association and its guests.Summary:1. Legality of Playing Rummy with Stakes:The primary question was whether the activity of the respondent-Mahalakshmi Cultural Association in allowing its members and guests to play rummy (13 cards) with stakes is legal. The court referenced the Apex Court's judgment in State of Andhra Pradesh v. K. Sathyanarayana, AIR 1968 SC 825, which held that rummy is a game of skill. However, the court noted that if rummy is played with stakes, it would amount to gambling. Consequently, the provisions of Section 49 of the Chennai City Police Act, which exempts games of mere skill from penal provisions, would not apply if stakes are involved.2. Police Authority to Raid and Take Action:The court examined the powers conferred under the Chennai City Police Act, particularly Sections 23, 42, and 43, which empower the police to enter, search, and take action against common gaming houses without a warrant. The court upheld the police's authority to raid the Association's premises based on reasonable suspicion or reliable information of illegal gambling activities. The court emphasized that the police must ensure that cards, dice, gaming tables, or other instruments of gaming are found in the premises to presume it as a common gaming house.3. Definition and Implications of 'Common Gaming House' and 'Gaming':The court elaborated on the definitions provided u/s 3 of the Chennai City Police Act, which includes any place used for profit or gain by gaming as a 'common gaming house'. 'Gaming' includes wagering or betting, except on horse races. The court cited Kishan Chander v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1965 SC 307, to highlight that the possession of instruments of gaming in such premises constitutes evidence of illegal gaming activities.4. Rights of the Association and Its Guests:The court acknowledged the Association's right to conduct lawful activities and entertain members and guests. However, it held that allowing members or guests to play rummy with stakes or making any profit or gain from such activities would attract the penal provisions of the Chennai City Police Act. The court directed the Association to refrain from indulging in any illegal activities and instructed the police not to disturb the Association without reliable information of illegal activities.Conclusion:The court modified the order of the learned single Judge and issued the following directions:1. The Association shall not allow its members or guests to play rummy with stakes or make any profit or gain.2. The police are entitled to take action if any illegal activity is carried out in the Association's premises.3. The police may proceed with the FIR against those found indulging in illegal gambling during the raid on 10.08.2011.4. The police should not disturb the Association frequently under the guise of inspection without reliable information of illegal activities.Consequently, M.P.No. 1 of 2011 was closed with no costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
