SADASHIV DEVJI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIVE accused persons, including the present applicant who was accused No. 1 in the Court below, were prosecuted in the Court of the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay, for offences under Sections 4 (a) and 5, Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. Upon the evidence adduced before him, the learned Magistrate convicted the present applicant of the offences under Sections 4 (a) and 5 of the Act and sentenced him as regards the charge-under Section 4 (a) to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month, but ho did not impose a separate sentence against the applicant under Section 5 though he convicted him of that offence. Feeling aggrieved by the convictions and the sentence imposed upon him, the first accused has come up in revision and upon his behalf Mr. I. C. Dalai has contended that the convictions and the sentence imposed upon the first accused cannot be supported.

(2.) NOW, the facts leading, up to the prosecution are simple. Sub-Inspector Mehendale is attached to the Special Squad, C. B. I. , C. I. D. , Bombay. He is specially empowered under Section 6, Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act. On 6-4-1955 at about 6-10 p. m. in consequence of information received by him, he sent for one Shantaram Damodar Ghag to his office. Shantaram's person was searched in the presence of the Panchas and upon his person were a few annas and a handkerchief. The money which was found upon his person was taken charge of by Sub-Inspector Mehendale in the presence of the panchas, but the handkerchief which was on his person, was allowed to remain with him. A one-rupee note was then given to Shantaram again in the presence of the panchas and its number was noted in a panchanama made at the time. Shantaram was then instructed to go to a room which is room No. 1-A in Rodrigue's chawl, Bhattipada Road, Bhandup, Greater Bombay, in order to lay a bet at that place on figures 0-6 open to close with the money which was given to him. A panchanama was made and Sub-Inspector Mehendale, accompanied by the two panchas, Shantaram and the staff then left the office in a police van. The van then proceeded upon its journey and arrived near the petrol pump on Agra Road at a distance of about 15 to 20 minutes' walk from the chawl in question. Sub-Inspector Mehendale and the staff, who were then dressed in plain clothes, got down from the police van and starts ed walking towards the Rodrigue's Chawl with Shantaram walking ahead of them. Sub-Inspector Mehendale, the panchas and the staff followed Shantaram. Shantaram then entered the Rodrigue's Chawl while the Sub-Inspector, the panchas and the staff stood at a distance of some 50 paces from the said chawl and at this time Sub-Inspector Mehendale and the panchas saw Shantaram entering the Chawal. Shantaram then entered room No. 1-A on the ground floor of the Chawl when he found accused No. 1 seated on a chair in front of a table inside the room. Accused No. 5 was seated on the floor near the entrance of the room. Shantaram thereupon approached accused No. 1 and gave his name as Shantaram and figures 0-6 open to close and handed over to him the one-rupee note which was given to him by Sub-Inspector Mehendale. Accused No. 1 accepted Shantaram's bet and recorded the same on a slip of paper with a pencil. Shantaram then came out of the chawl and gave Sub-Inspector Mehendale a signal as previously arranged and went away to his residence. Sub-Inspector Mehendale thereafter raided the room in question, the panchas and the staff accompanying him at the time. When Sub-Inspector Mehendale, the panchas and the staff went there, they found all the five accused persons inside the room with accused No. 1 seated on a chair near a table, accused Nos. 2 and 3 standing in front of accused No. 1, accused No. 4 being seated on a cot and accused No. 5 upon the floor of the room near the entrance of the room. The persons of the accused were then searched in the presence of the panchas and a sum of Rs. 13-11-0 including the marked rupee-note was found in the left side front pocket of accused No. 1's shirt Accused No. 1 was holding an English Booklet which was in front of accused No. 1 which was upon the table and upon this booklet a chit (Ext. B/1) containing a ecord of satta bets written in Kanarese language was found. Various other articles were then found at the place and in due course the accused were charge-sheeted before the Magistrate.

(3.) IN support of the prosecution case, the prosecution gave evidence of Sub-Inspector Mehendale, the punter Shantaram, the panch Sltaram and a witness by name Shetty who read the names in Kanarese on the satta chits. This evidence was directed to establish the prosecution case.