THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.1967 OF 2009 DATED: 05-08-2010 Between 1.Vallabhu Rama Krishna Rao @ Rambabu and seven others …Petitioners –A1 to A8 And State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. …Respondent-Complainant THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.1967 OF 2009 ORDER: This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.152 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Narsapuram, West Godavari District, which was taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, 1974 (for short ‘the Act’) 2. It is alleged in the charge sheet that on 12-04-2008 in obedience to the instructions of Sub Divisional Police Officer, Narsapuram, police conducted raids at the thatched shed of A1 in the presence of mediators and on seeing them, A1 absconded and on search, they found A2 to A8 playing game by betting amount. They arrested the accused and seized 52 playing cards and an amount of Rs.7,500/- under a cover of mediators report. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that even if the entire allegations in the charge sheet are taken as true and correct, at this stage, they do not make out prima facie case of the offences alleged, that it is alleged that the accused are playing Rummy in the gaming house and therefore it would not attract the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. For that he relied upon a decision reported in STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH V K. SATYANARAYANA AND OTHERS [1], wherein it was held thus: “We are also not satisfied that the protection of S. 14 is not available in this case. The game of Rummy is not a game entirely of chance like the 'three-card' game mentioned in the Madras case to which we were referred. The 'three card' game which goes under different names such as 'flush', 'brag' etc. is a game of pure chance. Rummy on the other hand, requires certain amount of skill because the fall of the cards has to he memorized and the building up of Rummy requires considerable skill in holding and discarding cards. We cannot, therefore, say that the game of Rummy is a game of entire chance. It is mainly and preponderantly a game of skill. The chance in Rummy is of the same character as the chance in a deal at a game of bridge. In fact in all games in which cards are shuffled and dealt out there is an element of chance because the distribution of the cards is not according to any set pattern but is dependent upon how the cards find their place in the shuffled pack. From this alone it cannot be said that Rummy is a game of chance and there is no skill involved in it. Of course, if there is evidence of gambling in some other way or that the owner of the house or the club is making a profit or gain from the game of Rummy or any other game played for stakes, the offence may be brought home. In this case, these elements are missing and therefore we think that the High Court was right in accepting the reference as it did. “ From the above decision, it is clear that Rummy is not a game of chance, but it is only a game of skill. When it is a game of skill, it is not a game within the meaning of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. If the uncontroverted allegations in the charge sheet if taken as true and correct, at this stage, they reveal that the accused are playing Rummy with 52 cards, which according to the above decision is a game of skill. Therefore, the proceedings are liable to the quashed. 4. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.152 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Narsapuram, West Godavari District. ------------------------------- JUSTICE K.C.BHANU DATED:05-08-2010 Hsd [1] AIR 1968 SC 825