Bitchala Tirumala Rao v. The State Of Telangana

[ 3385 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16085 OF 2024 Between:

1. Bitchala Tirumala Rao, S/o. Pedda Ramulu, Age 50 yrs., Occ Advocate, R/o. H. No. 20-7-1117l1 Road No 13, Sri Ram Nagar, Khammam Town andDistrict

2. Nerella Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Late Balakrishna, Age 58 yrs., Occ Advocate,R/o. H. No.3-7-182122 Al Sundaraiah Nagar, Khammam Town andDistrict

3. Chekuri Mukthewawar Rao, S/o. Venkataiah, Age 51 yrs., Occ Advocate, R/o. Gudimalla Village, Khammam Rural Mandal and District

4. Arempala Venkateswerlu, S/o. Anandam, Age 5! yrs., Occ Advocate, Rl/o. H. No. 11-'t't-3171224 Ramanna Gutta, Khammam Town andDistrict ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED AND 1 . The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor

2. The Station House, Khammam Haveli Police Station ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the above case i.e., CC No. 4175 of 2024 on the file of ll Addl. Judicial First-Class Magistrate at Khammam, against the Petitioners. I.A. NO: 1OF 2024 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim stay of all further proceedings in CC No. 4175 of 2024 on the file of ll Addl. Judicial FirslClass Magistrate at Khammam, including the personal appearance of the petitioner pending disposal of the above criminal petition.

t This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.l6O85 of 2024 ORAL ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNSS) to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused in C.C.No'4175of 2024 on the Iile of the II Additional Judicial lVlagistrate of First Class, Khammam, registered lbr the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Telangana State Gaming Act., 1974.

2.

Heard Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud, iearned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent-State' Perused the record' \ 3.

l,earned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the order dated O3.O4.2024 in Criminal Petition No.9645 of 2023' l

4.

l,earned Assistant Public Prosecutor also submitted that the issue in the present criminal petidon is covered by the earlier order in the above criminal Petition 5.

[n view of the said submission and as the matter is squarely covered by the order in the above criminal petition, this criminal petition is allowed in terms of the above said order, adopting the reasoning contained therein. Accordingly, the proceedings initiated against the petitioners/accused in C'C'No'4175of 2024 on the file of the Ii Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, ale hereby quashed'

Pending miscellaleous petitions, if any' in this Criminal Petition shali also stand closed.

Sd/. T. JAYAFREE TANT REGISTRAR .A/ ASSIS //TRUE COPY// SECTtONgFFtCER To, 1IlE"S,'"f"1"'*L"J;li'3fi *1"',[?'fi1iiliff,lE1?fl "T13'S3i[n'Khammam District 3.TwoCCstothePubltcProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hvderabad. IOUTI a. Ohe CC to Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud' Advocate IOPUCI

5. Two CD CoPies VI{/gh \qa -' -'l { --_-'ra---:i.'t-

\

'!

i.:

HIGH COURT DATED: 3111212024 o 1Hi'. S 14 {r.

.t t ,0 7 iA[ 2025 o

ORDER

* i CRLP.No.16085 ot 2024 a ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION r("b XN CO

t // TIIE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL ON No.9645 OF 2023 // / ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is Iiled under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.J to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 19, in C.C.No.83O of 2023, on the lile of the learned Principal Judicial Mag,strate of First Class, Sircilla, Rajaana Sircilla District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Telangana State Gaming Act, 1974.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the respondent registered a case against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 19 stating that, on receipt of credible information ttrat some of the persons were running common gaming house in Sirbilla Town Club building, playrng 3 cards by betting money and running gaming for wrongful gain, he has taken authorization letter from SDPO, Sircilla to enter into the gaming house and arrest the gamblers, search ald seizure of money, plaSnng cards etc. On 06.05.2O23. the Police encircled the said building in tJle presence of two mediators and found that the petitioners were playing three cards by betting. Immediately, the Police took them into custody and seized an amount of Rs.1,34,79O/- and three sets of playng cards from their possession. Basing on the said complaint the police registered a

crl-P.No.9545 OF 2023 case €rnd after completion of investigation, tJrey frled charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sircilla, Rajanna Sircilla District.

3.

Heard Sri P. Giri Krishna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. Petitioner No.1 is the President and petitioner No.2 is the SecretarJr of the Sircilla Town Club. They used to go to the town club regularly. When Petitioner Nos.l and 2 were conducting skilled game with other petitioners, the Police have purposefully entered into the premises and took them into their custody. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied on the Judgment of the High C-ourt of Andhra Pradesh in D. Krishna Kum.ar and o,notlrrlr rs. State o.f An;dlruro. Pradesht, wherein it is categorically held that playng rummy is a game of skill. He further relied on the Uudgment of this Court in Criminal Petition No.5169 of 2023, wherein it is categorically held that since petitioner No.1 is the owner of the house used for playlng games, the same cannot be termed as common gaming house.

'zoo2lsllLr aoe

srs,J CtLP.No-9615 OF 2023 5.

Leamed counsel for the petitioners further submitted that v/ithout following the proced.ure laid down under the Telalgana / State Gaming Act, the prosecution has faJsely implicated the petitioners. It is further contended that the game of playing cards is not a,, offence per-se, it is a, offence when it is carried on in a public place or in a common gaming house as defined under the Gaming Act. Therefore, he prays tJle Court no case is made out against the petitioners.

6.

On the other hand, leamed counsel for the respondent submitted that as the petitioners are playing cards by investing money and the statements of witness clearly reflects ttrat they are plalnng three cards game, he prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

l 7 .

It is pertinent to note that the judgment of this Court dated 26.09.2022 in Tholem Narsimha Rao and. oLnother as. State oJ Telangana and. anotherz, wherein in paragraph Nos.14 and 15, it is held as follows:

'14. In uieut of the pinciple laid. d.orun in the aboue sai.d. citations, it cannot be said that the petitioners-accused .iyos.6 and Z lnue committed. tILe offence under Sectrrcn 3 of the A.p. Gaming Act, more particularlg when tlere is tw person, uho taas in_ charge and in possessbn for collecting moneg t zoz:1r1no 1ca.; :ze 6s1

tollards usage charges. Tterefore, Section 3 of the A.P. Gaming Act cannot be fastened on the petitioners-accused Nos.6 and- 7 as the house' uherein theg are alleged to twue been plaging cards is not a gaming house.

15. The petitioners-accused' Nos'6 and' 7 utere charged for th.e offence under Section 4 as uell as Section 3 of the A.P. Gaming Act' Therefore, it is to be examined. uhether facts narrated bg the prosecation would amount to committing of an offence under Section 4 of the Act- In the case on han.d', atcording to the prosea)tion, the petitioners u)ere present for the purpose of gaming in a common gaming lnuse shall on conuiction maY suffer for simple impisonment for six montls, ttthich may ertend to tLaree years. Unless tle plore of tle offerce is specrfied to be a common gaming house, Section 4 of the A.P. Gaming Act Luill not attract "

8.

Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the learned counsel, having gone through the material available on record and having considered tl1e view taken by this Court in Criminal Petition No.5169 of 2023 and in Criminal Petition No.g68Tof2016thatthepremiseswherethepersonswereplaying cards, cannot be termed as a gaming house as defined under Section 2(1) ofthe Act. Since it is not a gaming house' Section 3 of the Act is not applicable; thereby the petitioner cannot be punished for the offence punishable under Section 4 of ttre Act as such' the allegations levelled against the petitioners are liable to be quashed'

srs,J CrLP-No.9645 OF 2O2A 9.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 19 in C.C.No.830 of 2023, on the file of the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sircilla, Rajanna Sircilla District, are hereby quashed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

K. SUJANA, J Date: O3.O4.2O24 sAl .jsL