- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2886 CRL.P No. 100699 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100699 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: HANUMANTHA SA S/O NAGENDRASA MERAVADE AGE: 36 YEARS OCC: HOTEL EMPLOYEE, R/O: NEA SAIBABA TEMPLE, KOPPLA CITY, KOPPAL-583 231. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.C. JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA , BENCH, DHARWAD-580 001, (THROUGH KOPPAL TOWN P.S.) … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK A.KATTIMANI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SE. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.348/2024 BY LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM KOPPAL (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.46/2024 REGISTERED TOWN P.S. KOPPAL) FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 78(3) OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963, BY ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION IN SO FOR AS THIS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.19 13:15:32 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2886 CRL.P No. 100699 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. The petitioner, who is facing charges for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, has approached this Court seeking relief. 3. The prosecution alleges that on 06.04.2024, in Koppal City, near the circle towards the Nandini Shop, the complainant received credible information that an individual was placing bets on a cricket match between Royal Challengers Bangalore and Rajasthan Royals. on conducting raid it was discovered that the Petitioner was engaged in cricket betting . 4. The issue of whether betting on cricket matches falls within the purview of Section 78 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, was examined by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.100036/2024, wherein this Court held as follows: “12. One of the petitioners is a bookie said to be involved in betting. Sri Hashmath Pasha has relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Cricket Association of Bihar & Others, (2016 (8) SCC 535), where it was observed that betting should be legalized. It was argued by the respondent that betting amounts to gaming, which is an offence under the Karnataka Police Act. However, if Section 2(7) of the Karnataka Police Act is examined, its explanation clearly states that a ‘game of chance’ does not include any athletic game or sport. Cricket is a sport, and therefore, even if betting takes place, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2886 CRL.P No. 100699 of 2025 it cannot be brought within the ambit of the definition of ‘gaming’ as found in the Karnataka Police Act.” 5. Admittedly, the petitioner is alleged to have been involved in betting on a cricket match. A coordinate Bench of this Court has categorically held that cricket is a sport, and if betting takes place, it does not fall within the definition of ‘gaming’ as provided under the Karnataka Police Act. Therefore, in the absence of the essential elements required to constitute an offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, the continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC.No.348/2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge CJM, Koppal, insofar as the petitioner – accused is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN CT:BCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45