: 1 : WP-2195-11 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2195 OF 2011 Naseeb Kala Krida and Sansrutik Mandal, Ajra, Dist. Kolhapur ... Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondent Mr. Hrishikesh Mundargi, i/b. Mr. Vinayak Patil, for the Petitioner. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP, for the Respondents. CORAM:V.M. KANADE & A.M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATED :15 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The Petitioner is a Social Club, which is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The aims and objects of the Club are to promote peace, harmony and unity amongst the local community by organizing various games like cricket, football, rummy, bridge, etc., and it also plans to organize get­togethers and dinners for its members and their guests. According to the Petitioner, the officers of Respondent No.2 Ajra Police Station are harassing the Petitioner by threatening them that they would take action against them under the provisions of the Gambling Act. The Petitioner has, therefore, filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs : : 2 : WP-2195-11 “(a). Rule be issued; (b). this Hon’ble Court by issuing appropriate writ/order/direction be pleased to direct the concerned competent authority not to interfere and prevent any lawful activities of the Petitioner Society; (c). this Hon’ble Court by issuing appropriate writ/order/direction be pleased to restrain/prevent the Respondent from harassing and threatening the petitioner; (d). such further and other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.” 3. It is submitted that so far as the game of rummy and bridge are concerned, it is not a game of chance and, therefore, the officers of Respondent No.2 should be directed not to harass the Petitioner and not to interfere and prevent the Petitioner from carrying out lawful activity for the Petitioner­Society. 4. In our view, such a writ cannot be issued by this Court. No averment has been made in the Writ Petition and no particulars have been given as to when Respondent No.2 or its officers threatened the Petitioner that they would take legal action against them under the Gambling Act. In our view, therefore, the Writ Petition has been filed prematurely under an apprehension that some action would be taken against them by Respondent No.2. 5. The Writ Petition, therefore, cannot be entertained and the same, therefore, is disposed of. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)