- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10789 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. MR VIKRAM LOKESH @ VIKRAM S/O SRI LOKESH B.K. AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O NO. 203, 3RD MAIN, 6TH CROSS, CHAMARAJPETE, BENGALURU - 560 018. 2. MR. RAGHU L, S/O SRI. LAKSHMAN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O NO. 73, LALBHAG SIDDAPURA, JAYANAGAR 3RD BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. MR. JAYANTH B.R., S/O SRI RAMACHANDRA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O NO. 13, 3RD MAIN, 2ND CROSS, CHAMARAJPETE, BENGALURU - 560 018. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BHARATH KUMAR V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VISHWANATHAPURAM POLICE STATION BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 2. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VISHWANATHAPURAM POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA.R, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) BY PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR BEARING NO.186/2023 ALONG WITH THE INFORMATION DTD 13.11.2023 REGISTERED WITH THE VISHVESHWARAPURAM P.S., WHEREIN THE PETITIONERS HEREIN ARE ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NOs.1, 4, 7, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 79 AND 80 OF THE K.P ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC (TRAFFIC COURT-IV) BENGALURU, ANNEXED VIDE ANNEXURE A AND A1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs: “ a. Quash the FIR bearing No.186/2023 along with the information dated 13.11.2023 registered with the Vishveshwarapuram Police Station wherein the Petitioners herein are arraigned as accused No. 1, 4 and 7 for the alleged offence under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, pending on the file of JMFC(Traffic Court-IV), Bengaluru. (annexed vide Annexure-A and A1). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 b. Quash the order dated 13.11.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court IV), Bengaluru in matter bearing V.V. Puram Police Station NCR No. 97/2023, wherein the Hon'ble Trial Court was pleased to pass orders under Section 155(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code directing registration of FIR the information received in matter bearing V.V. Puram Police Station NCR No. 97/2023 and consequentially investigate the same for the offence punishable under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act (Annexure B) C. Quash the final report preferred by the Respondent No. 1 Police; wherein, the Petitioners herein are arraigned as Accused No. 1, 4 and 7 respectively for the alleged offence under Section 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, pending on the file of MFC(Traffic Court-IV), Bengaluru (Annexure B1) d. Pass any order/s as deems fit to this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the impugned complaint is filed against the Petitioners for allegedly playing ‘Poker Betting’ and the said game is a ‘Game of Skill’ and not a ‘Game of Chance’ as held by the co-ordinate Bench of this - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 Court in the case of D. M. Gaming Pvt. Ltd., and Another Vs. The State of Karnataka and Another – Crl.P.No.6280/2024 dated 16.01.2025, wherein it is held as under: 1. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Shri Sandesh J.Chouta appearing for the petitioner. 2. The issue in the lis is answered by this Court in Crl.P. No.5658/2024, disposed of on 3rd December 2024. This Court in an identical submission projected has answered the same by holding as follows: "9. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that the club of the petitioners is a recreational club in which Poker is a game inter alia that is played. When the Police more than a decade ago sought to register crimes on the score that the game of Poker would be gambling, the Indian Poker Association had approached this Court against the action of the State in interfering with the games or tournaments conducted in the respective premises where Poker was played, on the score that game of Poker was a game of skill. A coordinate Bench of this Court in INDIAN POKER ASSOCIATION v. STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2013 SCC OnLine Kar 8536 disposed of the petition holding as follows: “…. …. ….. "6. Having already taken note of the fact that in respect of the game of poker if played as a game of skill, license is not contemplated and further keeping in view the fact that permission in this case has been obtained in that regard, certainly, the petitioner would be entitled to conduct such - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 games, provided, the same is in accordance with law. However, it is to be clarified that, if the respondents have any definite information with regard to the illegal activities, only in such event, the respondents would be entitled to take action in accordance with law and the same shall not ordinarily be indulged in, to prevent the lawful activities of the petitioner. 7. In so far as the grievance of the petitioner with regard to the 4th respondent, I am of the opinion that the allegations as made against the 4th respondent, at this juncture need not be gone into in the instant petitions, more particularly, in the circumstance when the respondents have adverted to certain legal proceedings that have been taken by them. However, if the petitioner has any specific grievance against the 4th respondent or any other police officer who may interfere with the activities of the petitioner without authority of law, it would always be open the petitioner to make appropriate representation to the next higher authority of the police concerned including a representation to the Commissioner of Police bringing to the notice of the higher authority the actual grievance of the petitioner against the concerned police officer. If such representation is made by the petitioner, certainly such higher authority shall look into the same as expeditiously as possible and find out if any action is required or not in that regard." After the establishment of the petitioners' club, the harassments alleged to have continued which drove these very petitioners to this Court in Writ Petition No.55798 of 2017. This Court, following the earlier order, disposed of the petition by the following order: “… … … 3. The issue which has been raised in the instant petition has already been considered by this Court in W.P.No.30071/2014 dated 15-10-2014 (The Media N Members Club vs. State of Karnataka and Others) wherein the petition was disposed of with the following directions:- "(i) The petitioner shall install within a period of six weeks. CC TV cameras, at all the places - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 of access to its members and also at all the places, wherein games(s) is /are played by the members. The CC TV footage of atleast prior 15 days' period shall be made available by the petitioner, to the police, as and when called upon to do so. (ii) The petitioner shall issue identity card(s) to all its member(s), which shall be produced by the member(s), when called upon by the police, during survelliance etc. the raid(s) and (iii) The petitioner shall not allow any non-or the guest(s) of the member(s) member(s), to make use of its premises for the purpose of playing any kind of game(s) or recreational activities. (iv) The petitioner shall not permit any activity by any of its member(s), by indulging in acts of amusement, falling within the definition of Ss.2(14) & 2(15) of the Act and shall not permit any game(s) of chance as per Explanation (II) of Sub-section (7) of Section 2 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The member(s) shall not be allowed to play any kind of game(s) with stakes or make any profit or gain out of the game(s) played. (v) The petitioner shall put proper mechanism in place and shall ensure that no game(s) is played in any unlawful manner by the member(s). If the police find that game(s) played is contrary to any law and in violation of the settled practice, it is open to them to take action against petitioner and the offenders, in accordance with law. (vi) The jurisdictional police shall have liberty to visit premises periodically and/or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner's premises. (vii) The respondents interfere with are directed not to the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner Club / Association. (viii) It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking the provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the member(s) of the petitioner are found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 This writ petition is also disposed of in the aforesaid terms." While disposing the petition, certain directions were issued. The directions were that club would issue identity cards to all its members and produce them as and when called upon by the police and the club should put proper mechanism in place to ensure that no games are played in any unlawful manner and the Police were permitted to conduct routine visits. Despite this, on an allegation that the petitioners' recreation club was being repeatedly harassed by the Police, they invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this Court in C.C.C.No.894 of 2021. The contempt comes to be disposed of by the following order: “… … … 4. Sri. A.S. Ponnanna, learned Senior Counsel for complainant pointed out that this Court while disposing of the writ petition specifically instructed the police not to interfere with the lawful activities carried on by the members of the petitioner-Club/Association. Police in the name of periodical visitation Thereby, the have interfered with the lawful activities of the Association. Therefore, it is a fit case to initiate contempt proceedings and sought to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Sri. V.Sreenidhi, learned AGA reiterating the objections filed pointed out that direction Nos. 6 and 8 reads as under: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 "(vi) The jurisdictional police shall have liberty to visit premises periodically and/or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner's premises; (vii) xxx xxx xxx (viii) It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the member(s) of the petitioner indulged in any activities." are found to have unlawful or immoral activities.” and submits that in terms of the directions issued by this Court, jurisdictional police have liberty to visit the premises periodically and/or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner's premises and has specifically invited our attention to para 5 of the objections that," respondent-Police at no point of time, have violated any law or any of the orders passed by this court. The action of the Respondent-Police is in the usual course of the Police conducting their official business to ensure that no unlawful activities are being done within the premises of the Complainant's Club. Therefore, he sought for dismissal of the contempt petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is an un-disputed fact that, this Court while disposing of the writ petition No.55798/2017 on 13- 12-2017 issued 08 directions as stated supra. Direction Nos. 6,7 and 8 should read conjointly and harmoniously. After reading the said directions, it - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 clearly depict that the police officers/ respondents should not interfere with the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner's Club. At the same time, police shall have a liberty to visit the premises periodically and or on receipt of any information about unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioners' premises. This Court also made clear that the observations made or directions issued at 1 to 7 would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking the provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the members of petitioner's association found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities. Therefore, the contention of the learned Senior counsel that this Court granted injunction restraining the accused not to interfere with the lawful recreational activities cannot be accepted. The fact remains that, if the unlawful activities carried on by the members of petitioner's association, a check is necessary, thereby, direction Nos. 7 and 8 were incorporated reserving liberty to the police. 7. The of Sub-Inspector Indiranagar, has filed an affidavit on oath before this Police, Court against oath filed by the complainant and specifically stated that allegations made in the contempt are false and Hoysala team visited the club on 25-10-2021 only to ensure that no unlawful activities are being conducted within the premises of complainant's-Club and police have not violated any conditions of the Court. The police in usual course visited the premises. In fact, in para-3, police - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 reiterated the action is in accordance with law to ensure that no unlawful activities are being carried out within the premises of the complainant's recreation club and thereby there is no violation made by the accused as alleged by the complainant. 8. It is made clear that the police can visit premises of the complainant's club periodically to check any unlawful activity being carried on in the premises. Merely because the present petition is filed, the police cannot take vengeance and initiate proceedings as stated in para 6 of the objections. The Police are the protectors of law to ensure that there should not be any unlawful activities not only among the members of the Club or general public they should act like members of civilized society and they should not take vengeance." The Division Bench also holds that the Police can visit the premises of complainant's club periodically to check any unlawful activity. It is said that the Police did not stop interference and harassment. The petitioners' club again invokes the contempt jurisdiction of this Court in C.C.C.No.842 of 2023. the submission of the Additional Recording Government Advocate, the Division Bench disposed of the petition by the following order: "ORDER 1. This contempt petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 13.12.2017 in learned Single Judge passed by W.P. No. 55798/2017. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that the accused particularly, - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 the police officials have closed down the premises of the complainant. 2. The learned Additional Government Advocate invited our attention to the affidavit dated 21.09.2023 filed by accused No.3-Sri Govardhan, Police Inspector, Indiranagar Police Station, Bengaluru and submits that the premises of the complainant is never shut off by the accused; the accused visits the premises on routine basis as directed by the learned Single Judge, vide order dated 13.12.2017 in W.P.No.55798/2017 wherein clause (vi) clearly states that the jurisdictional police is granted liberty to visit premises periodically and or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried out in the complainant's premises. In view of these factual aspects, in our opinion, nothing survives for consideration in the contempt petition and the same is accordingly disposed off. Notice is discharged." The petitioners are again back to the doors of this Court, in the subject petition, on the same song of harassment by the Police. The crime now is registered on 11-06-2024. Since the entire issue has triggered from the registration of crime, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. It reads as follows: “gÀªÀjUÉ, ¥ÉÆ°Ã¸ï ¸À¨ï – E£ïì¥ÉPÀÖgï, EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ. EAzÀ, ²æà ¸ÀÄzÀ±Àð£ï ºÉZï.« ¦.L. EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉÃ, - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 «µÀAiÀÄ:- EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ oÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀ¢Ý£À 80 Cr gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ £ÀA:233, L±ÀéAiÀÄð CA¨Áå¸ÉqÀgï JA§ PÀlÖqÀzÀ°è mɯï gÀÆA JA§ ºÉ¸Àj£À ¥ÉÆÃPÀgï PÀè¨ï£À°è CPÀæªÀÄ dÆeÁl £ÀqɸÀÄwÛgÀĪÀªÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä PÉÆÃj. ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ. £Á£ÀÄ F ¢ªÀ¸À ¢£ÁAPÀ: 11.06.2024 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11-30 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ°è oÁuÉAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÁUÀ gÉÆûvï wªÁj ºÁUÀÆ CAmÉÆä «£ÀAiÀiï PÀĪÀiÁgï ºÁUÀÆ EvÀgÀgÀÄ EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÁ ¸ÀgÀºÀ¢Ý£À 80 Cr gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ £ÀA: 233, L±ÀéAiÀÄð CA¨Áå¸ÉqÀgï JA§ PÀlÖqÀzÀ°è n¯ïÖ gÀÆA JA§ ºÉ¸Àj£À ¥ÉÆÃPÀgï PÀè¨ï C£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj PÀè¨ïUÉ PÁ¯ÉÃeï ºÀÄqÀÄUÀgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ AiÀÄĪÀPÀgÀ£ÀÄß ºÀtzÀ D«ÄµÀ¢AzÀ DPÀ¶ð¹, CªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÉÃj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ CPÀæªÀÄ ¯Á¨sÀPÉÆÌøÀÌgÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ºÉaÑ£À ºÀtUÀ½¸ÀĪÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV ¸ÀzÀj n¯ïÖ gÀÆA C£ÀÄß dÆf£À ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÁßV ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ dÆeÁlªÀ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ £À£ÀUÉ ¨sÁwäzsÁgÀjAzÀ ªÀiÁ»w §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. CzÀgÀAvÉ £Á£ÀÄ ªÀiÁ»wAiÀÄ£ÀÄß RavÀ¥Àr¹PÉƼÀî¯ÁV ªÉÄîÌAqÀ gÉÆûvï wªÁj ºÁUÀÆ CAmÉÆä «£ÀAiÀiï PÀĪÀiÁgï ºÁUÀÆ EvÀgÀgÀÄ ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀjUÉ ºÀtzÀ D«ÄµÀ vÉÆÃj¹ CªÀjUÉ n¯ïÖ gÀÆA UÉ ¥ÀæªÉñÀ ¤Ãr CªÀjAzÀ D£ï¯ÉÊ£ï ªÀÄÆ®PÀ n¯ïÖ gÀÆA£À ««zsÀ CPËAmïUÀ½UÉ ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ PÀ«ÄõÀ£ï ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAUÀqÀªÁV PÀrvÀUÉƽ¹ ºÀtzÀ §zÀ°UÉ ««zsÀ ªÀiË®åPÉÌ mÉÆÃPÀ£ïUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤Ãr E¹àÃmï J¯ÉUÀ¼À ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ CzÀȵÀÖzÀ dÆeÁlªÁr¸ÀÄvÀÛ CzÀgÀ°è UÉzÀÝ ªÀåQÛUÀ½UÉ ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß D£ï¯ÉÊ£ï ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ PÉÆqÀĪÀÅzÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ PÀ«ÄµÀ£ï ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß n¯ïÖ gÀÆA£À ««zsÀ ¨ÁåAPï CPËAmïUÀ¼À°è ¥ÀqÉzÀÄPÉƼÀÄîwÛgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁ»w §A¢gÀÄwÛzÉ. ¸ÀzÀj dÆeÁlªÀ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀ®Ä mÉç¯ïUÀ¼ÀÄ, E¹ÖÃmï PÁqÀðUÀ¼ÀÄ, mÉÆÃPÀ£ïUÀ¼ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ EvÀgÉ dÆeÁlzÀ ¥ÀjPÀjUÀ¼À£ÀÄß G¥ÀAiÉÆÃV¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ w½zÀÄ §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀzÀj dÆeÁlªÁqÀ®Ä §gÀĪÀªÀgÀ DzsÁgï PÁqÀð, ¥Áå£ï PÁqÀð ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¨ÁåAPï CPËAmï £ÀA§gï – UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ UÁæºÀPÀgÀ ¨ÁåAPï CPËAmï ¤AzÀ ºÀt ªÀUÁðªÀuÉ ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀÄîwÛgÀĪÀÅzÁV w½zÀÄ §A¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀgÀÄ ¥ÀæªÀÄÄRªÁV AiÀÄĪÀPÀgÀÄ D£ï¯ÉÊ£ï ªÀÄÆ®PÀ n¯ïÖ gÀÆA£À CPËAmï UÉ ºÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀUÁð¬Ä¹ CzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀªÀÄ£ÁzÀ (PÀ«ÄõÀ£ï ºÉÆgÀvÀÄ¥Àr¹) mÉÆÃPÀ£ïUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀj mÉÆÃPÀ£ïUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÀtzÀgÀÆ¥ÀzÀ°è D mÉç¯ïUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯ï ¥ÀtªÁV PÀnÖ E¹àÃmï J¯ÉUÀ¼À ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ: CzÀȵÀÖzÀ dÆeÁlªÁqÀÄwÛgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 ªÉÄîÌAqÀ DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÉÆÃPÀgï UÉêÀiï ºÉ¸Àj£À°è n¯ïÖ gÀÆAC£ÀÄß dÆf£À ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÁßV ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ ¸ÀzÀj dÆeÁlzÀ ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°è CzÀȵÀÖzÀ dÆeÁlªÁqÀÄvÀÛ CPÀæªÀĪÁV ºÀt ¸ÀA¥ÁzÀ£É ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ªÉÄîÌAqÀ DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ dÆeÁlzÀ°è vÉÆqÀVgÀĪÀ ºÁUÀÆ CzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀºÀPÀj¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ DgÉÆæUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ jÃw PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀAvÉ PÉÆÃgÀÄvÉÛãÉ. ªÀAzÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ, vÀªÀÄä «±Áé¹, ¸À»/- (¸ÀÄzÀ±Àð£ï ºÉZï.«.) ¥Éưøï E£ïì¥ÉPÀÖgï EA¢gÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ.” This becomes the crime in Crime No.155 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of the Act. They are admittedly non-cognizable offences. Therefore, the nod of the learned Magistrate was necessary. The learned Magistrate has permitted registration of crime and it is only then the crime comes to be registered. 10. A perusal at the complaint would nowhere indicate that the petitioners have indulged in unlawful activities in the club. The complaint only narrates that at the time of conduct of inspection by the police what was seen was that persons who were in the club were not members of the club and tokens were taken in exchange of Rs.3,000/-and certain cash of Rs.9000/- was seized and from mobile phones the transaction happened for several thousands. The complaint though narrates these factors, the narration would run counter to the judgments passed by the constitutional Courts where these games of Poker and Rummy are held - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 to be games of skill. A Division Bench of this Court in ALL INDIA GAMING FEDERATION v. STATE OF KARNATAKA - 2022 SCC OnLine Kar 435, holds that a game of chance and a game of skill though are not poles, but are too distinct legal concepts of constitutional significance. The distinction lies in the amount of skill involved in the games. The Division Bench observes as follows: ‘… … … 7. Note: The collective ratio unmistakably emerging from all the decisions mentioned in paragraphs IX & X above put succinctly is: A game of chance and a game of skill although are not poles asunder, they are two distinct legal concepts of constitutional significance. The distinction lies in the amount of skill involved in the games. There may not be a game of chance which does not involve a scintilla of skill and similarly, there is no game of skill which does not involve some elements of chance. Whether a game is, a 'game of chance' or a 'game of skill', is to be adjudged by applying the Predominance Test: a game involving substantial degree of skill, is not a game of chance, but is only a game of skill and that it does not cease to be one even when played with stakes. As a corollary of this, a game not involving substantial degree of skill, is not a game of skill but is only a game of chance and therefore falls within the scope of Entry 34 in the State List. In a later judgment, a Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad in DM GAMING PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF U.P. - 2024 SCC OnLine All 5009 has held as follows: "… … … 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, to buttress his arguments, has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in State of Andhra Pradesh v. K.S. Sathyanarayana, AIR 1968 SC 825 as well as in the judgment of Madras High Court passed in - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 Junglee Games India Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu (W.P. No. 18022 of 2020) and stated that games of Poker an Rummy are the games involving skill and not gambling. He further submits that the impugned order dated January 24, 2024 does not address any of the issues and simpliciter denies the permission for such gaming unit on the basis of surmises and conjectures that there may be possibility of peace and harmony being disrupted and gambling (jua-satta) taking place. 4. In light of the fact that gambling is prohibited, the permission was denied without going into the aspect that card games i.e. Poker and Rummy are absolutely a game of skill and not gambling. 5. Upon considering the various aspects, we are of the view that the officer concerned should look into the aspect after examining the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts on the said issue. Denial of the permission only on the basis of the clairvoyance of the officer concerned cannot be a ground that can be sustained. Hard facts are required to be brought on record by the officer to deny the permission for carrying out the recreational gaming activities. 6. Needless to mention that the permission being granted by itself would not prevent the authorities concerned to check on the aspect of gambling that may take place at a particular place and if the same happens, necessary action under law can always be taken by the authorities. 7. In light of the above observation, the authority concerned is directed to revisit the issue and pass a reasoned order after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of six weeks from date." 11. On a coalesce of the judgments rendered by the Division Bench and the coordinate Benches of this Court and the Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad what would unmistakably emerge is, the game of Poker is a game of skill and the interference by the Police cannot lead to - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 harassment. The Division Bench while disposing of C.C.C.No.894 of 2021 observes that the Police who are the protectors of law should ensure that there is no unlawful activities carried on, not only among the members of the club or general public, they should act like members of civilized society and should not become a tool of wrecking vengeance. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the impugned crime finding no ingredients of Sections 79 and 80 of the Act, as held by the coordinate Benches of this Court, in the case at hand as well. However, all the directions that have been issued in the case of the petitioners from time to time, as and when they have knocked at the doors of this Court in the respective petitions, be followed in letter and spirit. No shackles can be put on the hands of the Police not to visit the recreation club even if they are in receipt of credible information about unlawful activities in the club. Reserving their right and finding nothing of that sort at this juncture in the impugned proceedings, I pass the following: O R D E R (i) Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The order under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. dated 11-06-2024 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court-I, Bangalore in NCR No.313 of 2024 and the FIR registered in Crime No.155 of 2024 stands quashed. (iii) It is made clear that all the directions issued by the respective Benches which dealt with the - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 cases of the petitioners and the like are to be followed in letter and spirit by the petitioners." 3. Learned Additional SPP who has appeared physically would seek to dispute the facts obtaining in the case at hand qua the application of the judgment and he does not in a position to dispute what is held by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. 4. In that light, I deem it appropriate to grant the same relief as is granted in Crl.P. No.5658/2024. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court pass the following: ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The FIR in CCB Bengaluru on the file of the 1st Addl. CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bengaluru City and complaint in Crime No.0017/2024 at Annexures-A and B registered by the second respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 79, 80 and 103 of the Police Act stands quashed. (iii) It is made clear that all the directions issued by the respective Benches which dealt with the cases of the petitioners and the like are to be followed in letter and spirit by the petitioners.” 4. The issue in controversy involved in the present petition is also directly and squarely covered by the judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in D. M. Gaming Pvt. Ltd.’s case - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28887 CRL.P No. 10789 of 2025 supra and consequently, the impugned proceedings deserve to be quashed. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.186/2023 registered by the 1st respondent – Police (arising out of NCR No.97/2023) and further proceedings in C.C.No.1826/2024, pending on the file of JMFC (Traffic Court - IV), Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 79 and 80 of Karnataka Police Act, insofar as the petitioners are concerned, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Srl.