J. K. BHARATI versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS .

Citation: [1985] 1 S.C.R. 201 · Decided: 23-07-1984 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: O. CHINNAPPA REDDY · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
. 
' 
-l 
-
J. K. BHARAT! 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS . 
July 23, 1984 
[0. CHINNAPPA REDDY, A.P. SEN AND E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.] 
Constitution of India 1950, 
Article 14, Entry 40 of List 1 of Schedule 
VJJ and Entry 34 of List 11 of Schedule Vil and The Bo1nbay Lol/eries 
(Control and Tax) and Prize Competition (Tax) Act 1958, Section 32 (c). 
Lotteries-r/otteries autho1ised but not organised by the govcrn1nent of 
other states'-Ban on sale of such lottery tickets-Whether competent-Whether 
any discrimination involved. 
The petitioner in their writ petitions to this Court contested the b.ao 
on sale within the St"ate of Maharashtra, of tickets of lotteries organised 
by the Indian 
Red~Cross Society. Dadra and Nagar Have!i 1 branch and 
authorised by the ad1ninistration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. 
Dismissing the wtit petitions, 
HELD : ( l) (i) The Bombay Lotteries (Control and tax) and Prize 
Competition (Tax) Act, 1958 is an Act to control and tax lotteries and 
prize competition in the State of Maharashtra. 
The Act contains detailed 
provisions for the licensing, regulation and control of lottery within the 
State of Maharashtra. Section 32(c), provides that nothing in the Act shall 
apply to "a lottery specially authorised by the State Government." [2030-H] 
(ii) 
Io 
the case of lotteries 
authorised by the GoYeromeot of 
Maharashtra, the Government of Maharashtra may retain to itself all neces• 
sary powers for the regulation and control and the prevention of misuse of 
funds and e-xploitation of guileless members of the public. 
In the case Of 
lotteries authorised by the Government of other States it may be difficult 
and even impossible for the Government of Mahara sbtra to takeadequate 
regulatory steps to prevent abuse of the authority given by Governments 
of other States to non·Governmental agencies to 
organnise lotteries. It 
may be equally difficult for the Governments of other States to take 
201 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
ff 
202 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1985) l s.c R. 
' 
A 
adequ.1te measures for prevention of abuse of such authority within the 
State of Maharashtra. [204C-D] 
B 
c 
2. 
No hostile discrimination whatever is involved in not extending 
the exemption from the applicability of the Bombay Lotteries (Control and 
Tax) and Prize Competition (Tax) Act, 1958 'to lotteries ~uthorised but 
not org=tnised by the Go~ernment of other States'. [2040] 
. 
3. 
Lotteries organised by the Government of India or the Govern· 
).... 
meat of the State have been taken out .from Entry 34 of List II of Schedule 
VJ[ by Entry 40 of List 1.- There !s, the.refore no question about the 
co~petence of the Legislature of Afaharashtra to legislate in respect of the 
sail! or distribution, in tha State of M1harashtra, of tickets of all lotteries 
organised by any agency whatsoever other than the Government of India 
or the Government of a State. [203E-F] 
H. Anraj and others v. State of Maharashtra, explained. 
D 
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: 
Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 12820, 
12592, 
112714, 12736, 12747, 12821, 1'035and13022of1984. 
E 
G 
H 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India). 
Dr. Y. S. Clzitale, Vtmal Dave, Randhlr Singh, 0. Swamy, 
. Vineet Kumar, N. K. Sharma, Ms. Deepika Saxena. S. M. Ashri 
and M. Vee;appa for the Petitioners. 
-N. H. Gursahani and M. N. S!zro.lf for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was deHvered by 
~-' 
C11INNAPPA REDDY, J. This order is virtually a postscript to 
' our judgment in H. · Anraj and Ors. v. State of Malwrasflim 
What -Vas in questiol) in H. Anraj and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra 
-was the ban imposed by the Government of Maharashtra on the 
sale of tickets of lotteries conductc~ by the Government of other 
States in the State of Maharashtra. What is presently in question 
in the writ petitions before us is the ban on the sale of tickets of 
lotteries authorised but not organised by the Governments of other 
States. Specifically, we are concerned with the ban on sale, within 
the State of l\faharashtra, of tickets of lotteries organised by the 
Indian Red Cross Society, Dadra and Nagar Haveli branch and 
authorised by the adminsitration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. In 
Anraj and Ors. v. SIPte of Maharashtra we held th.'.lt the subject" 
J. K. BHARTI v. MAHARASHTRA (Chi1111appa Reddy, J.) 
203 
"Lotteries organised by the Government of India or the Government 
of a State" had been taken out from the lcg1stative field, comprised 
by the expression "Betti

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.