EMPEROR Vs. MAHOMED DAWOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, who were accused Nos. 1 and 7 in the Court below, were convicted respectively under Sub-section 4 (a) and Section 5 and under Sub-section 4 (b) and Section 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act and sentenced to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500, in default to suffer a further one month's rigorous imprisonment by Mr. S.A. Hatteea, Presidency Magistrate, Ninth Court, Bandra.

(2.) Tried with the appellants were 15 other persons, who were charged under Section 5 only, and were convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each. They have not appealed.

(3.) It is now common ground that on the afternoon of April 21, 1945, which was Easter Sunday, all the accused were playing cards for money in a flat at 111, Chapel Road, Bandra, the tenancy of which is in the name of the wife of the appellant who is accused No. 7, and that Inspector Solomon of the Bandra Police Station, who is an officer specially authorised by order of the Commissioner of Police made under Section 6 of the Act, and a party of about 15 constables raided the flat on that afternoon. Nor can it be disputed that playing cards and a sum of Rs. 365-7-3 were exposed on the floor amidst the 17 accused, and that the pockets of the 17 accused, when they were searched, produced a further total sum of upwards of Rs. 3,300. These circumstances by themselves do not necessarily constitute an offence (see Reg. V/s. Davies [1897] 2 Q.B. 199 and Emperor V/s. Chimanlal Maneklal (1917) 19 Bom. L.R. 693.)