- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13735 CRL.P No. 4479 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4479 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SUDHAKAR H B S/O NARASIMHA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS NO.14/1, 10TH CROSS, SRINAGAR, BENGALURU -560 050 …PETITIONER (BY SRI ADARSHA.R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HANUMANTHANAGAR PS, BENGALURU DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU -560 001. 2. SUNIL KADDI PSI, MAJOR IN AGE, FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN, HANUMANTHANAGAR PS, BSK 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU – 560050 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE DATED 28.11.2023 PASSED BY THE IV METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE TRAFFIC COURT, BANGALORE, IN Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13735 CRL.P No. 4479 of 2025 C.C.NO.11076/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 79 AND 80 OF K.P. ACT, 1963, BASED ON THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 - HANUMANTHANAGAR P.S AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: a. Call for the entire records in CC No.11076/2023 pending on the file of Hon'ble IV Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bangalore., for the offences punishable under section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963., registered by the Respondent No.1/ Hanumanthanagar PS. b. Set aside the order of taking cognizance dated 28.11.2023 passed by the Hon'ble IV Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bangalore., in CC.No.11076/2023 for the offences punishable under section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963., based on the chargesheet filed by the Respondent No.1/ Hanumanthanagar PS. C. Quash the entire criminal proceedings in C.C.No. 11076/2023 pending on the file of Hon'ble IV Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bangalore., for the offences punishable under section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13735 CRL.P No. 4479 of 2025 Police Act, 1963., registered by the Respondent No.1/ Hanumanthanagar PS. d. Pass such other relief /reliefs as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstance of the present case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. In the petition filed by the co-accused, this Court while quashing the proceedings has held as follows: “2. The petitioners are before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.11076/2023 pending on the file of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bangalore, for offences punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the issue in the case at hand stands covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P. No. 2227/ 2024, disposed of on 13.06.2024, wherein this Court has held as follows: “3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue in the case at hand stands covered by the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.100877/2014, disposed on 13.06.2014, which read as follows: "5. On analysing the above said provision of law, this Court has rendered a decision reported in 1971(2) Mys. L.J. 187 in the case of Chickarangappa & Others Vs. State of Mysore and another decision reported in 1977 (1)K.L.J. 274 in the case of Eranna Vs. State of Karnataka, which decisions declare that, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13735 CRL.P No. 4479 of 2025 “playing ‘Andar Bahar’ is a game of skill and not mere a game of chance and therefore, the offence punishable under Section 79 and 80 of the Act are not attracted”. 6. In the ruling reported in 1977 (1) K.L.J. 274(supra), this Court has categorically held that, game of ‘Andar Bahar’ is not a game of chance. The facts are also little bit relevant as quoted in the said case. At paragraph 7 of the said judgment, it is stated that; “In this view of the matter, the essential ingredient of the offence was not proved. It could not be established that the petitioner –accused were playing a game of chance and one does not know how the game ‘Andar Bahar’ is actually played with the assistance of cards. Even if any betting was resorted to and even if any pledge of moveables was made in support of that betting, that by itself did not convert a game of a skill into a game of chance. At any rate it was not categorically proved that ‘Andar Bahar’ is a game of chance and that these accused were playing that game. They were not covered under the definition of gaming in a common house. Since the institution where the accused were found playing the game with cards is a club, it is not unusual that cards are played in a club, and it may even be that some betting was also being done. These facts by themselves never proved that a game of chance was being played or that no skill was involved in that game so that it could be considered to be a mere game of chance. It is manifest that a game of skill would not beheld to be gambling for the purpose of the Act. In this view of the matter, no offence under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 was made out against the petitioners. Hence the conviction of sentence was set aside”. (Emphasis supplied) In the light of the afore-extracted judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and in the facts - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13735 CRL.P No. 4479 of 2025 obtaining in the case at hand, which covers the issue on all its fours, I deem it appropriate to quash the proceedings, qua the petitioners." 3. In the light of the proceedings against the co-accused being quashed, the said benefit would enure to the petitioner as well. 4. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The Petition is allowed; and (ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.11076/2023 pending on the file of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court, Bengaluru, qua the petitioner, stand quashed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1