Playing Cards For Money At Home In Absence Of 'Profit-Making' Element Not Offence Under Gambling Act: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court has held that merely playing cards in a house for money does not necessarily make the house a "common gaming house" to invoke offences under Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act in absence of element of profit-making. The court was hearing a plea by five accused persons seeking quashing of an FIR under Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act.The prosecution alleged that the...
The Gujarat High Court has held that merely playing cards in a house for money does not necessarily make the house a "common gaming house" to invoke offences under Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act in absence of element of profit-making.
The court was hearing a plea by five accused persons seeking quashing of an FIR under Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act.
The prosecution alleged that the effect that the informant-police officer while discharging his duties along with other police officers received anonymous tip that certain persons were gambling at a house. When they carried a raid at the location, they allegedly found a table in the dining room around which five individuals were seated. The informant saw them playing cards and coins of varying colours, and thus, the FIR was lodged.
Justice PM Raval referred to the provisions of the Act including definition of common gaming house and said:
"From the entire papers of the charge-sheet which are placed before this Court for perusal, there is not an iota of evidence that the house which was raided was used for the profit or gain of the person owning, occupying, using or keeping such house by way of charge for the use of instrument of gaming or of the house, and thus, the fact that the petitioners herein were playing cards in a house, perhaps for money, does not necessarily make it a common gaming house.
Thus, the element of profit or gain being an essential ingredient, which does not surface on record either from the entire papers of the chargesheet nor ever is there an iota of allegations in the FIR itself, except for stating that the house is used for gambling, it cannot be said that the provisions of Section 4 are attracted, inasmuch as does not fall within the four corners of gambling house, for which the provisions of Section 4 and 5 would ultimate attract"
The court also said that the competent authority has to make inquiry as he may think necessary before issuing a special search warrant, that the house was used as a common gaming house.
"When the FIR itself does not states that the house was used as a “common gaming house” or that the house was used where instruments of gaming are kept for profit or gain or by way of charge for the use of such house. Under such circumstances, the provisions of the Gambling Act, more particularly, that of Sections 4 and 5, cannot be said to be attracted..." the court said.
The petitioners argued that the house which was raided does not fall within the four corners of “common gaming house” under the Act. It was argued that no inquiry was undertaken to arrive at a conclusion that there were good grounds to suspect that the house under question was used as a “common gaming house”.
The court allowed the plea and quashed the FIR.
Case title: JOYALBHAI NILESHBHAI SHAH & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 4465 of 2022
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 219
Appearance:MR. TEJAS BAROT, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DHAVAL M BAROT(2723) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. K. M. ANTANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1