IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 440 of 2005 Between: Sri Copparapu Venkata Krishna Nilayam Reading Room and Club, No.4-255, Rajaji Street, Markapur, Prakasam District, rep. by its President, Tallapalli Venkata Satyanarayana, S/o. Bala Rangaiah, aged 43 Years, R/o. Markapur, Prakasam District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District at Ongole. 2 Deputy Inspector General of Police, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 Deputy Superintendent of Police, Markapur, Prakasam District. 4 Inspector of Police, Markapur Town, Markapur, Prakasam District. 5 Sub Inspector of Police, Markapur Town P.S., Markapur, Prakasam District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ and direct the respondents to forbear from interfering with the activities of the petitioner in particularly the card room of the petitioner where the members and guests are allowed to play game of rummy with stakes and syndicate. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court at the admission stage made the following: O R D E R: Petitioner is a club. Its grievance is that the respondents are interfering with its activities and preventing its members from playing rummy with stakes or in syndicate. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in State of A.P. v. K. Satyanarayana, the Supreme Court held that rummy with 13 cards is not a game of choice and it is a game of skill. He contends that Sections 3 and 4 of the A.P. Gaming Act, 1974 (for short “the Act”) do not apply to such game, and it falls within the meaning of game of ‘mere skill’ under Section 15 of the Act. Learned Government Pleader for Home, on the other hand, submits that under the guise of playing the game of rummy, the members of the petitioner are resorting to three cards play, which is purely the one of choice. As part of its activities, the petitioner is maintaining a card room. It is stated that the members of the petitioner club are playing only the 13 card rummy, sometimes with stakes and sometimes in syndicate. In view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, the respondents cannot interfere with the playing of rummy by the members of the petitioner. However, if it is noticed that the members of the petitioner are playing any game of choice, including the one with three cards, steps can certainly be taken in accordance with law to prohibit and penalize such activities. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall not interfere with the lawful activities of the members of the petitioner, namely, playing of rummy with 13 cards with stakes or in syndicate and in case, they are found to be playing any other game of skill, it shall be open to the respondents to take such action as is open to them in law. It is also made clear that under the guise of causing inspection, the officials or advocate-commissioners shall not be posted and the activities of the club cannot be crippled. No order as to costs. ________________ 25th January, 2005 pan To 1 Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District at Ongole. 2 Deputy Inspector General of Police, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 Deputy Superintendent of Police, Markapur, Prakasam District. 4 Inspector of Police, Markapur Town, Markapur, Prakasam District. 5 Sub Inspector of Police, Markapur Town P.S., Markapur, Prakasam District. 6 Two C.Cs to the Govt.Pleader for Home, High Court building, Hyderabad (OUT). 7 Two C.D.copies.