( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3162 OF 2010 Rajendra s/o. Ramnarayan Rathod .. Applicant Age. 47 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Tophkhana, Thakur Galli, Ahmednagar, Tal. & Dist. Ahmednagar. Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. P.D. Bachate, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, A.P.P. for the respondent. CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 23.08.2010 P.C. :- 1. This is an application seeking anticipatory bail under section 438 of Cr.P.C. 2. It appears that offence has been registered vide Crime No. II 103/10 against the applicant on basis of certain information which was received from one Nana Thakappa Katkar, who was caught on 31st July, 2010, while accpeting money on ( 2 ) issuance of Chitthis. He was found in possession of Rs. 3317/- along with certain articles including a note-book, a ball-pen and a book containing printed numbers. It is alleged that he was running a gambling game called “Kalyan Matka”. He informed the police that Kalyan Matka was being operated by the applicant and one Santosh Kale. 3. Heard learned counsel and learned A.P.P. 4. On perusal of the recitals of F.I.R. and other material, it is amply clear that when the raid was conducted, only one person i.e. Nana Katkar was found while preparing Chitthis. It is alleged that two other persons fled away and thereafter their names were disclosed by Nana Katkar. 5. The offences registered against said Nana Katkar and the applicant include offence under section 12-A of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. That offence is of bailable nature. So far as, applicability of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 is concerned, the legal position appears to be rather doubtful. Section 4 (c) would show that only the State Government will have monopoly to sell lottery ( 3 ) tickets either itself or through distributors or agents. Section 2 (b) defines word “Lottery” as a scheme, in whatever form and by whatever name called, for distribution of prizes by lot or chance to those persons participating in chances of a prize by purchasing tickets. Section 4 (h) reveals that no lottery shall have more than one draw in a week. In order to attract provision of section 2 (b), it is required that the prosecution must make out a case to show that a scheme for distribution of prizes by lot or chance was being operated. Broadly stated, running of “Kalyan Matka” may come within ambit of provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887, yet, it is difficult to appreciate that it may be termed as a scheme intended to distribute prizes as per the chance. Secondly, the applicant was not found and nobody identified him as the same person who was found running away from the place. In this view of the matter the following order would meet ends of justice. 6. The applicant be released on bail, in the event of arrest, on furnishing of bail bond in sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) along with surety bond in equal sum and further on condition that he will attend the ( 4 ) concerned police station on each Monday and Friday between 07.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. and between 08.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m. for four weeks or till filing of the charge-sheet, whichever is earlier. 7. The application is disposed of. [V.R. KINGAONKAR,J.] snk/2010/AUG10/cra3162.10