EMPEROR Vs. HUSSEIN NOOR MAHOMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in this case have been convicted as being persons found playing for money against the provisions of Section 12 of the Bombay Prevention Gambling Act 1887 in a railway carriage forming part of a through special train running between Poona and Bombay.

(2.) The only question is whether it was in a public place that the accused were so playing. This depends on the meaning the word "place" has in Section 12 of the Act. The word "place" is, I think, qualified by the word "public" and having regard to its context and its position in that context, it must, in my opinion, mean a place of the same general character as a road or thoroughfare, else it was pointle (sic) to use the words street or thoroughfare as they are there used To the Railway track as such the public have no right of access except as passengers in the Company's train. Therefore I need not seriously consider the suggestion that the accused were found playing in a public place, because the carriage in which they were playing was on the railway track. To support the conviction it must be shown that the railway carriage was a public place of the same general character as a public street or thoroughfare. I would be slow to place on the section an interpretation that would curtail its legitimate scope, but I am unable to regard the railway carriage, in which the accused were, as possessing such characteristics of, or bearing such a general resemblance to, a street or thoroughfare as to justify us in holding that it was a public place within the meaning of Section 12 of the Act, with which alone we are concerned.

(3.) The conviction and sentence must therefore be set aside and the fine, if paid, refunded. Russell, J.