K.L. MANSUKHANI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petitioner challenges the criminal proceedings initiated as L.A.C. No. 2194/91 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Kurla, Bombay on the allegation that the provisions of Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act has been violated by the petitioner. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner was conducting a video game parlour at Akash Galli. Kurla. There are several video game machines kept and displayed at his parlour which are used by the members of the public for the purpose of amusement. He has been conducting the shop for the last five years. Those machines are being used only for amusement and will not come under the purview of Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri Chitnis in this context brought to my notice a decision of this Court rendered in Criminal Writ Petition No. 580/88 wherein it has been declared by the learned Single Judge of this Court that the video game as conducted by the petitioner therein is not a gambling so as to attract the provisions of the Prevention of Gambling Act 1987. The learned Judge by an elaborate discussion made a distinction between the game and gaming, and the business conducted by the petitioner is not one which falls under the word 'gaming'. According to me, the said decision does squarely apply in the facts of this case. In the lights of the above decision I am only to allow the writ petition. In the result the writ petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer Clause (i). No order as to costs. Prayer Clause (i): That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for record and proceedings and quash L.A.C. No. 2194 of 1991, pending prosecution in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Kurla, Bombay.