Senior Citizens Playing Cards In Their House Booked Under Gambling Act, Bombay High Court Suggests Them To Settle With Complainants

The Bombay High Court on Monday (November 24) stayed proceedings in an FIR lodged against five senior citizens booked for allegedly playing cards in their house under the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act.

The court was hearing a writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR lodged under Sections 4 (which punishes keeping of a common gaming house) and 12(A) of the Act. Section 12A states that a Police Officer may apprehend without warrant any person who prints, publishes, sells, distributes or in any manner circulates in any news-paper, news-sheet or other document or any news or information with the intention of aiding or facilitating gaming.

It further empowers the police officer to enter and search any place for the purpose of seizing, and may seize all things reasonably suspected to be used or to be intended to be used, for the purpose of committing an offence under this section. 

The counsel appearing for the five petitioners submitted before Chief Justice Sree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad that the petitioners are a group of senior citizens, ages 75-81 years, who have been booked under Gambling Act for playing cards at their house on November 7. 

The petitioner counsel said, "They are all friends..." At this stage the court court orally asked, "Why don't you go for compounding. This will not help you really".

On the court's query the counsel said, "On the 6th November there was a raid at my residential premise".

"Post after four weeks, in the meantime don't proceed...,"the court orally said. 

At this stage the State's counsel submitted that there were two women who lost the money and they had lodged the complaint. 

On the court's query regarding the women the counsel said, "They were playing there". The court inquired as to why had the women gone to the premises and said, "Why they had gone there? Was it a parlour? How were they aware?".

The counsel said, "They were having information...physically they are going there". 

The court thereafter orally said to the State's counsel, "So question is, had they won, then others would have filed...What is this ground? They lost the money so they filed this case. They went to you only because they lost money". 

Meanwhile the court asked the petitioner's counsel as to how much money had the two women lost. The counsel said that he shall verify the amount. 

"My lords may protect me...they (police) plan to file a chargesheet against me," the petitioner's counsel said. 

To this the court said, "We have stayed the proceedings. Go and settle in the meantime". 

Case title: HARPAL CHHABRA AND ORS. v/s STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

WP(ST)/22899/2025 [Criminal]