Sky Flower Recreation Club v. The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Sky Flower Recreation Club, Rep. by its President, D.Shreeram, S/o.Devaraj, No.3/117 D, Trichy Road, Karanampettai, Palladam, Tiruppur District - 641 401.

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, 2.The Inspector of Police, Palladam,

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of 1/6

India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the lawful activity of playing "Rummy" (13 Cards) without stakes or money by the members of the petitioner club, based on the representation dated 07.10.2025.

For Petitioner :

Mr. T.Bashyam For Respondents :

Mr. K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus, to forbear the respondents from interfering with the lawful activity of playing "Rummy" (13 cards) without stakes or money by the members of the petitioner club, based on the representation dated 07.10.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a sports club registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, (Act No.XXI of 1860). The said club is not involving in any gambling activities and only rummy is being played. It is only a game 2/6

of skill and therefore, the police authorities do not have any jurisdiction to interfere with the petitioner club which are providing recreational facility to its members.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that normally, the police will not interfere with the affairs of the club. If gambling and betting activities are taking place inside the club, the police is entitled to interfere with the day-to-day activities of the club. Moreover, the petitioner has not obtained any license from the municipality as required in law, to run the club. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief.

4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court 3/6

without going into the merits of the case, is inclined to pass the following order:

"To run the recreation club, the petitioner has to obtain prior permission from the competent authorities like municipality. After getting permission only, the petitioner club can indulgence in playing cards, that too without any betting and gambling. If the police finds that in the name of game of skill, any gambling or betting is organised, then the police is entitled to act as per law."

6. With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. No costs. 05.11.2025 kan To:

1.The Superintendent of Police, 4/6

2.The Inspector of Police, Palladam, 5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

kan 05.11.2025 6/6