Skip to content


Shiva Charan and ors. Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Reported inAIR1933All482
AppellantShiva Charan and ors.
RespondentEmperor
Excerpt:
- .....by the systems adopted by the applicants, he might eventually receive nothing for his anna, although many purchasers received more than an anna's worth for their tickets.2. in support of the application in revision it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that what has been described above does not constitute gambling within the meaning of the public gambling act. in my opinion this contention is correct. it was more of the nature of a lottery and a harmless one at that. as no offence under the public gambling act has been committed the convictions cannot be upheld. i accordingly allow this application, set aside the convictions and sentences of the court below and direct that the fines, if paid, be refunded and the articles ordered to be confiscated be returned.
Judgment:

Kisch, J.

1. In this case three persons have been convicted by a First Class Magistrate in a summary trial of an offence under Section 13, Public Gambling Act, and have been sentenced to fines of Rs. 40, 30 and 10 respectively. The applicants had for sale a variety of articles of trifling value. These articles are said to have ranged in value from 2 pice up to about a rupee. They adopted the method of writing out as many tickets as there were articles with the name of one of the articles on each ticket. They took their barrow with the articles on it to the Jamna Bridge in Agra and invited purchasers to buy any ticket for one anna. The purchaser then received the article the description of which was written on the ticket. In the event of the purchaser being displeased with his purchase the applicants would take it back in return for another ticket or tickets, and if this process were repeated by one customer several times. over, by the systems adopted by the applicants, he might eventually receive nothing for his anna, although many purchasers received more than an anna's worth for their tickets.

2. In support of the application in revision it is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicants that what has been described above does not constitute gambling within the meaning of the Public Gambling Act. In my opinion this contention is correct. It was more of the nature of a lottery and a harmless one at that. As no offence under the Public Gambling Act has been committed the convictions cannot be upheld. I accordingly allow this application, set aside the convictions and sentences of the Court below and direct that the fines, if paid, be refunded and the articles ordered to be confiscated be returned.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //