Dismissed

Sri Sai Recreation Club, v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC4 Dec 2017WP/26140/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandate to prevent police interference with a recreation club playing rummy. The court directed that playing rummy without stakes is lawful but prohibited playing with stakes or profiting from it, restricting police inspections to cases with reliable information of illegality.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with directions: no stake/profit allowed in rummy; police action permitted on proof of illegality; no frequent inspections without reliable info.

Sri Sai Recreation Club, Vs The Superintendent of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.12.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

Writ Petition No.26140 of 2017

¶6

Sri Sai Recreation Club
Regn.SI.No.95/2017
Rep. by its President M.Ramasamy
453/1, Mettur-Bhavani Main Road,
Nerinjipettai
Andhiyur Taluk
Erode District, Pin Code - 638 311. .. Petitioner
versus
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police
Erode, Erode District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Ammapettai Police Station
Erode District. .. Respondents

¶7

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from in any manner interfering with the affairs of the petitioner's club viz., Sri Sai Recreation Club, Regn.SI.No.95/2017, No.453/1, Mettur-Bhavani Main Road, Nerinjipettai, Andhiyur Taluk, Erode District or its members including facilities provided for playing various games including the game of playing rummy not involving any element of gambling.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Elangovan For Respondents : Mr.R.Govindasamy Special Government Pleader.

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus forbearing the respondents from interfering with the lawful activity of playing "Rummy" (13 cards) by the members of the petitioner association.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶13

It is seen that a similar relief sought for in W.P.(MD) No.24078/2016 was considered and an order was passed on 08.03.2017, wherein the said Writ Petition was disposed of by imposing certain terms and conditions. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows.

¶14

The Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Section 3 of the City Police Act, 1888 defines the 'Common Gaming House', Section 45 of City Police Act prescribes the punishment for using a place as a Common Gaming House. A reading of both the provisions show that in a place where game is played on wager or bet, the police have got right to interfere and prosecute the persons who run the place under Section 45 of the City Police Act. In this case the petitioner is running a recreation club for its members, wherein according to the petitioner game of rummy is played without stakes.

¶15

However the Learned Additional Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the police are not causing any disturbance to the activities of the petitioner.

¶16

His submission is recorded. It is also seen that a Division Bench of this Court in Director General of Police, State of Tamil Nadu, Mahalakshmi Cultural Association (2012(2) CTC 484) has gone into this aspect of recreation club permitting the recreation club to play rummy without stakes and held as follows:

¶17

On the basis of the above discussions, we arrive at the following conclusions:

¶18

(1) The game of rummy (13 card) is only a game of skill even though an element of chance is also involved.

¶19

(2) In the event rummy is played by the members or the guests without stakes, the provisions of the Chennai City Police At are not attracted.

¶20

(3) In the event rummy is played by the members or the guests with stakes, the provision

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

of the Chennai City Police Act are attracted.

¶23

(4) In the event the Club/ Association either allows its members or guests to play rummy with stakes or make any profit or gain out of such gambling, the police has the authority to invoke the provisions of the Chennai City Police Act.

¶24

(5) In order to ascertain as to whether the premises is used as a gaming house for gambling, the Police is entitles to invoke Section 23 of the Act.

¶25

In view of the above, this Court directs that

¶26

(i) The petitioner association shall not indulge in any activity by allowing its members or the guests to play rummy (13 cards) with stakes and make profit or gain.

¶27

(ii) The police are entitled to take action in the event of any illegal activity is carried on in the Association premises.

¶28

(iii) The Police shall not disturb the Respondent-Association frequently under the guise of inspection without there being any reliable information as to the illegal activities of the association or its members or the guests.

¶29

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the very same order can be passed in this matter also since the relief is one and the same in both the matters.

¶31

Considering the above stated facts and circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by issuing the following observations and directions.

¶32

(i) The petitioner association shall not indulge in any activity by allowing its members or the guests to play rummy (13 cards) with stakes and make profit or gain.

¶33

(ii) The police are entitled to take action in the event of any illegal activity is carried on in the Association premises.

¶34

(iii) The Police shall not disturb the Respondent-Association frequently under the guise

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

of inspection without there being any reliable information as to the illegal activities of the association or its members or the guests.No costs.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

Assistant Registrar(CS IX)

¶39

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mk
To
1. The Superintendent of Police,
Office of the Superintendent of Police
Erode, Erode District.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Bhavani, Erode District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Ammapettai Police Station
Erode District.
+1cc to Mr.R.Govindasamy, Advocate, S.R.No.85576
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.86398
W.P.No.26140 of 2017
cs/08/12/17

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sri Sai Recreation Club, v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sai Recreation Club, v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Komalavalli, Vs The Registrar of Cooperative

A.Nirmala, Vs Under secretary

B.Nandhagopal, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Kanaka, Vs The Indian Oil Corporation

N.Subramani Vs The Inspector General of

B.Sudhakar, Vs The Revenue Divisional