NARAYANA SUBRAYA BHAT AND Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second petitioner is the son of the first petitioner. Both the petitioners have been convicted under S. 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act (which shall be hereinafter called 'the Act') and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 15/- each, in default to undergo S. I. for four days, by the learned Judicial Magistrate First, Class, Sirsi, in Criminal Case No. 1649 of 1957 on his file. They have come up in revision to this Court.

(2.) Sri B. V. Krishnaswamy Rao, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners formulated a threefold attack against the judgment of the Court below. According to him, the search conducted in this case is illegal as the Searching Officer did not get himself searched before entering the premises to be searched and consequently the seizures made should not be taken into consideration. His second objection is that as there is no satisfactory evidence to show that the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sirsi, who issued the warrant under S. 6 of 'the Act' has been satisfied that there are good grounds to suspect that the house, room or place to be searched is used as a common gaming house, the warrant is invalid. And lastly he contends that no presumption against his clients should have been drawn under S. 7 of 'the Act'.

(3.) The facts necessary for deciding the points urged, briefly stated, are as follows: The complainant in this case, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sirsi, applied and obtained from the learned sub Divisional Magistrate, Sirsi, on 16-8-1957 a warrant under S. 6 of 'the Act'. In pursuance of that warrant, he searched the shop of the first petitioner on 21-8-1957 at about 7-30 p.m. In the course of the search, he found in that shop a bundle of 11 slips bearing certain numbers. Out of those 11 slips, 4 chits bore that date of 21-8-1957: one chit bore the name of one Hanmanth and another bore the same of one Gowdappa. He also found a note book in a safe kept in that shop containing certain numbers. There were seven two rupee currency notes in that safe: 22 pop pictures which bore some dates and numbers; 3 odd exercises books below the safe, containing some numbers. These facts are proved by evidence of the complainant and his evidence is substantially corroborated by the panch witness Myragavya. The evidence of these two witnesses has been accepted by the trial Court and it appears to be creditworthy.