STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH versus K. SATYANARAYANA & ORS.

Citation: [1968] 2 S.C.R. 387 · Decided: 22-11-1967 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HIDAYATULLAH · Disposal: Dismissed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
v. 
K. SATYANARAYANA & ORS. 
November 22/23, 1967 
(M. H!DAYATULLAH AND C. A. VAIDIALINGAM, JJ.) 
Hyderabad Gambling Act (2 of 1305F), ss. 
3, 7 and 14-Extra 
clt?'ges levied by i:/ub for 
~laying cards, and playing beyond pres-
cribed hour-Common gambling house if constituted-Rummy, if a game 
of chance. 
The police raided the premises of a club and found respondents 
1-5 playing "Rummy" for stakes, counters and money on the table and 
playing-cards with the players. 
Respondent 6 the Treasurer of the Clllb. 
was holding the stake money. 
Respondent 7-the Secretary of the club 
was not present then. 
All the respondents were convicted by the Trial 
Court, but the comiction was set aside by the High Court. In appeal to 
this Court, the appellant-State contended that this club was a common 
gambling house as a fee of 5 points per game was charged. by the club, 
the playing-cards were supplied at an extra charge of Rs. 3. there was a 
sitting fee of Re. 1 per person who joined the game, and if the game 
continued beyond a certain time a late fee was levied; and further that 
the presumption under s. 7 of the Gambling Act had not been repelled; 
but on the other hand it .had been confirmed by the making 
of this 
charge by the club. 
Dismissing the appeal. 
· 
HELD : 
This club was not a common gambling house. 
The pre-
sumption under s. 7 even if it arises in this case, was successfully repelled 
by the evidence which had beon led. [392 DJ 
Just as some fee is charged for the games of billiards, ping-pong, tennis 
etc. an extra charge for playing cards (unless it is extravagant) would 
not show that the club was making profit or gain so as to render the club 
into a common gambling house. Similarly, a late fee is generally charged 
from members who use the club premises beyond the scheduled time 
This is necessary because ·the servants of the club who attend on the 
members h3''e to be paid extra remuneration by way of overtime, and 
expenditure on light and other amenities has to be incurred beyond club 
house. The accounts showed that the sitting fee of 50 paise was charged 
per person.. 
This was not such a heavy charge in a Members' Cub as 
to be described as an attempt to make a profit or gain for club. Of 
course, if it had been proved that 5 points per game was charged, that 
might have been con•idered as an illegal charge sufficient to bring the 
club within the definition. [392 G-393 CJ 
The protection of s. 14 was not available in this case. Rummy is not 
a game entirely of chance like the ·~ct' game. It requires certain 
amount of skill because the fall of the cards has to be mernoried and the 
buifding up of Rummy requires con.siderable skill in holding and dis-
carding cards. 
It is mainly and preponderantly a game of skill. 
The 
chance id Rummy is of the same character as the chance in a deal at 
a game of bridge. 
In fact in all games in which cards are shuffled and 
dealt out, there is an element of chance, because the distribution of the 
cards is not according to any set pattern but is dependent upon how the 
cares find their. place in the shutlled pack. From this alone it cannot be 
'2id that Rummy is a game of chance and there is no skill involved in 
it. 
Of course. if there is evidence of gambling in some other way or 
. 
Jn 
.. 
388 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1968] 2 S C.R. 
the owner of the house or club is making a profit or gain from the game 
of Rwnmy or any other game played for stakeo, the offence may be 
hrought home. [o93 F-394 Bl 
CRIMI!<AL· APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
40 of 1965. 
A 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 
August 4, 1964 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Crilninal 
B 
Revision Case No. 479 of 1964. 
P. Ram Reddy and B: Panhasarathy, for the appellant. 
A. S. R. Chari, K. Rajendra Chaudhuri and K. R. Chaudhuri, 
for the respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Hidayatullah, J. 
The State 
of Andhra Pradesh appeals by 
special leave against the judgment of the High Court of A11dhra 
Pradesh in which, accepting a reference by the Sessions Judge, the 
conviction of the respondents under ss. 4 and 5 of the Hyderabad 
Gamblin~ Act (2 of 1305F) ordered by the 5th City Magistrate 
at Secunderabad has· been set aside. 
The short question in this case is whether the premises of a 
Club known as the "Crescent Recreation Club" situated in Secun-
derabad were being used as a common

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