STATE Vs. RAMZIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of Ramzia and others by the Sessions Judge of Bikaner. The accused were convicted under secs. 3 and 4 in the case of Ramzia and under sec. 4 with respect to the others by a magistrate of the first class, Bikaner. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted them all on the ground that the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 (Ordinance No. XLVIII of 1949) (hereinafter called the Ordinance) was not in force in that area. He did not go into the merits of the case at all.

(2.) WE are of opinion that the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge that the Ordinance is not in force in that area is not correct. Sec. 1 of the Ordinance provides that secs. 13 and 17 would come into force at once. The remaining sections were to come into force by notification in the Rajasthan Gazette. The case of the State was that the notification was issued by order dated the 20th of July 1951 published in the Rajasthan Gazette of 28th of July, 1951 at page 419. This notification is No. F. I (200) Police 1/50 and says that in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec. (2) of sec. 1 of the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949, the Government of Rajasthan is pleased to extend all the remaining sections of the Ordinance to the areas mentioned in the annexed schedule. Unfortunately, though there is a list of places attached to this order, it is not headed 'schedule'. The heading is in there words - "list of places where the Extension of the Rajasthan Gambling Ordinance, 1949, is suggested". The learned Sessions Judge has held, in view of this heading that there is no schedule to this order and, therefore, the remaining sections of the Ordinance never came into force in Bikaner City, though Bikaner, City is mentioned in this list.