THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.30814 OF 2011 ORDER: Heard Sri S.Satyam Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the Learned Government Pleader for Home and at their request the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. The petitioner, an association registered under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act, is involved in promoting the game of ‘Bridge’ all over the State. It was registered as a sports association in the year 1971, and claims to be affiliated to the Bridge Federation of India which is recognized by the Indian Olympic Association. It is their case that, when the respondent - police officials had objected earlier to the game of Bridge being played in different clubs all over the State, Government had issued memo dated 21.02.2002 clarifying that there could not be any objection to the playing of Bridge games; and had directed Commissioners and Superintendents of Police in Andhra Pradesh not to interfere with such activities. According to the petitioner, though this was again reiterated by Circular Memo dated 25.11.2004, such instructions have, by and large, been ignored by those in the lower rungs of the police force. The petitioner would allege that, on 24.08.2011, the Krishna District Bridge Association was directed by the local police officials to stop playing the game of Bridge and, as their complaint to the Commissioner of Police was of no avail, the petitioner was constrained to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The urgency in filing the Writ Petition is said to be the 53rd Winter National Bridge Tournament scheduled to be held, from 04.12.2011 to 10.12.2011, at Chennai wherein the petitioner claims to have entered its participation in various events paying the fees prescribed. The game of Bridge is said to be played with 52 cards by two teams comprising of two members each. The game is said to involve a high degree of anticipation, skill and intellect apart from reading the mind, psychology and the cards of the opposite team. Sri S. Satyam Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would assert that the game of bridge involves a far higher degree of skill than Rummy (a 13 cards game), which has been held both by the Supreme Court and this Court to be a game of skill necessitating no action being taken in terms of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, 1974 (for short, “the Act”); the game of Bridge is more or less akin to the game of Chess; both these games are mind games, and not games of chance; and what holds good for the game of Rummy would apply with greater force to the game of Bridge which is widely perceived and acknowledged to be a game of skill unlike a game of Rummy. Learned Counsel would refer to the names of several eminent persons of high social standing whose active participation in the game of Bridge is said to be widely known. Following the judgments of the Supreme Court and of this Court in State of A.P. v. K. Satyanarayana; Dr. K.R. Lakshmanan v. State of Tamilnadu; Executive Club v. State of A.P. and D. Krishna Kumar v. State of A.P. this Court, in W.P.No.24533 of 2011 and batch dated 09.09.2011, held that competitions where success depended on a substantial degree of skill were not "gambling"; despite there being an element of chance, if a game was preponderantly a game of skill it would nevertheless be a game of "mere skill"; the expression "mere skill" would mean a substantial degree or preponderance of skill (Dr. K.R. Lakshmanan2); even if the game included an element of chance it could also be a game of 'mere skill' within the meaning of Section 15 of the Act; the applicability of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, was excluded in so far as it related to such games; and clubs which allowed persons to use the premises for playing a game of skill could not be said to be running a “common gaming house” as defined in Section 3 of the Act because Section 3, in view of Section 15 of the Act, did not apply to such a place. (D. Krishna Kumar4). The game of bridge not only involves a far higher degree of skill than the game of Rummy, but is also widely acknowledged as not being played for stakes, or for money. In such circumstances, I consider it appropriate to direct the respondent not to interfere with any bridge game being played by members of the petitioner association in different clubs. It is made clear that this order shall not preclude the police officials from entering the clubs concerned, from taking action in terms of Section 5 of the Act and, thereafter, initiating penal proceedings under Sections 3 and 4 for violation of the provisions of the Act. It is also made clear that the clubs concerned, wherein the game of bridge is played along with other card games, shall cause no hindrance to the respondent police officials in exercising their statutory powers under Section 5 or any other provisions of the Act. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J November 25, 2011 Note: Issue C.C. by 29.11.2011. B/O.MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.30814 OF 2011 November 25, 2011 MD