KHASEEM PEERA S/O LATE KHAJA HUSSAIN vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD


TH
DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104775 OF 2025

(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)

BETWEEN:

1. KHASEEM PEERA S/O LATE KHAJA HUSSAIN
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: WELDER,
TH
RESIDING OF: 24 WARD,
BEHIND MEER ALAM,
DARGA, SIRASANAKALLU,
HOSAPETE TALUK AND DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR.

2. HUSSAIN S S/O MABU S
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN,
TH
RESIDING OF: 13 WARD,
NEAR PRASHANTH HOTEL,
THORANAGALLU STATION SANDOORU,
TALUK AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

3. MAHAMMED RAFI S/O IMAM SAB
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: PRIVATE FIRM EMPLOYEE,
RESIDING OF: KALEKUDTHI VILLAGE,
KANEKALLU MANDALA ANDHRA,
NOW RESIDING AT: THORANAGALLU SANDOORU,
TALUK AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.


4. HANUMANTHAPPA C S/O LATE BALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,










Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


OCCUPATION: LABOURER,
TH
RESIDING OF: 9 WARD GUNDINAKERI,
HARAPANAHALLI,
TH
NOW RESIDING AT:21 WARD,
HOSAPETE, TALUK: HOSAPETE AND
DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGARA.

5. OBALESH S/O SANNA OBAYYA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: CONTRACTOR,
TH
RESIDING OF: HOUSE NO.30398, 9 WARD,
4TH CROSS, NEAR JANDA KA, HOSAPETE,
TALUK: HOSAPETE, DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR,

6. JILAN BHASHA S/O LATE MASTAN BHASHA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER,
ND
RESIDING OF: 22 WARD,
NEAR ANJUMAN, SHADI MAHAL,
AZAD NAGARA, HOSAPETE,
HOSAPETE TALUK AND DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR,

7. NASEER HUSSAIN S/O HUSSAIN SAB
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED,
RESIDING OF: 9TH WARD, 4TH CROSS,
S L CHOUKI, HOSAPETE,
HOSAPETE TALUK AND DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR.

8. YARISWAMY G S/O ANJINAPPA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESSMAN,
RESIDING OF: 21TH WARD,
MATHAPATHI ONI,
MAIN BAZAR, HOSAPETE,
TALUK: HOSAPETE AND
DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGARA.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


9. RANGANAYAKALU B S/O B MALLIKARJUNA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: MECHANIC,
RESIDING OF: HOUSE NO.149,
THIMMALAPURA RAILWAY STATION,
KUDUT,
TALUK: SANDOORU AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

10. HUSSAIN BHASHA S/O HONNURU VALI
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: MECHANIC,
RESIDING OF: 18TH WARD,
NEAR PUNJAB BANK,
JNR CAMP THORANAGALL,
TALUK: SANDOORU AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

11. ANJANEYALU S/O LATE ADIVEPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER,
RESIDING OF: 21TH WARD,
ANKALAMMA ROAD,
THORANAGALLU STATION T,
TALUK: SANDOORU AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

12. LOKESH S/O PEDDA MASTHANI
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER,
RESIDING OF: 6TH WARD,
NEAR SUNKLAMMA TEMPLE,
B R CAMP, RAILWAY,
SANDOORU,
TALUK: SANDOORU AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

13. ALIPEER S/O ABDUL KAREEM
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER,
RESIDING OF: 18TH WARD,
OPT. PANJAB BANK,

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


RAILWAY STATION, THORA,
SANDOORU,
TALUK: SANDOORU AND DISTRICT: BELLARI.

14. HULIGESH H S/O LATE DURUGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: CABLE OPERATORS,
RESIDING OF: 7TH WARD, 4TH CROSS, CHAPPARADALLI,
ANANTHASHAYANA, HOSAPETE,
TALUK: HOSAPETE AND DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MANOJ N. BIKKANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH,
AT: DHARWAD,
(THROUGH RURAL POLICE STATION HOSAPETE)
PIN CODE - 580 001.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS WITH C.C. NO.473/2025 ARISING OUT OF
(CRIME NO.11/2025) REGISTERED BY HOSPETE RURAL PS FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.112 OF BNS PENDING BEFORE THE
LEARNED II ACJ AND JMFC, HOSAPETE, WITH RESPECT TO
PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 14, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


ORAL ORDER

This criminal petition is filed under section 482
Cr.P.C/528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the entire
proceedings in CC No.473/2025 pending on the file of learned
II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete, Vijayanagara
District for the offence punishable under section 112 of BNS,
2023.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case in the nutshell is
as under:
On 15.01.2025, at 3.20 pm, the de-facto complainant
was on patrolling duty near Kariganoor Village, Hospete Taluk
wherein he received a credible information that some persons
were engaged in Andar-Bahar game in a forest area near
Ingaligi village. Hence, he lodged the complaint to the SHO.
Thus, the SHO registered the FIR in Crime No.11/2025 and on
the same day at 5.10 pm, the defacto complainant, his sub
staff and panchas conducted raid and caught hold of four
accused persons and the other accused fled away from the
place, he seized a sum of Rs.8,200/-, 52 playing cards under a
seizure panchanama and registered a case under section 112 of

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


BNS 2023. In turn, the Investigating Officer conducted the
investigation and filed the charge sheet for the aforesaid
offence. Taking exception to the same, the petitioners have
filed this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently
contended that these petitioners are falsely implicated in the
case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by
the prosecution. The Investigating Officer has failed to consider
that playing Andar Bahar is not a game of chance, but a game
of skill. Thus, the ingredient of section 112 of BNS 2023 is not
attracted. Therefore, the entire proceedings itself is not
maintainable. Further, the petitioners have not engaged in any
kind of betting or gambling and moreover, it was a game of
skill played for recreational purposes and under seizure
panchanama, a meager amount was recovered. Hence, the
ingredient of section 112 of BNS is not attracted. Further, the
prosecution has failed to prove as to how the game of Andar
Bahar was being played and in what manner, the betting was
recorded. Further, the prosecution has neither placed any
material to show as to how betting was invited nor they

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


collected the betting amount or created a gambling setup.
Further, there is no material to show that these petitioners
were playing gambling since many years and there is no
material to show that number of charge sheets had been filed
against these petitioners. These petitioners are working as daily
wagers. Hence, continuation of the proceedings would definitely
amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, he prayed to allow
the petition.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that the
petitioners were playing Andar Bahar game and seizure of
amount from them indicates that the petitioners were engaged
in gambling and therefore the ingredient of section 112 of BNS
is attracted. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. On perusal of the material available on record, more
particularly, the first information report and the charge sheet
material, the term used is Andar Bahar . In the complaint, the
defacto complainant has stated that he received credible
information as to playing Andar Bahar in the forest area near
Ingaligi village and in the seizure panchanama also, the term
Andar Bahar is used. At this juncture, the prosecution has not

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


placed any material so as to attract section 112 of BNS, 2023.
The said provision of law reads as under:
112. Petty organised crime - (1) Whoever, being a
member of a group or gang, either singly or jointly,
commits any act of theft, snatching, cheating,
unauthorised selling of tickets, unauthorised betting or
gambling, selling of public examination question papers
or any other similar criminal act, is said to commit
petty organised crime.
Explanation: For the purposes of this sub-section
“ theft ” includes trick theft, theft from vehicle, dwelling
house or business premises, cargo theft, pick
pocketing, theft through card skimming, shoplifting and
theft of Automated Teller Machine.
(2) Whoever commits any petty organised crime shall
be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall
not be less than one year but which may extend to
seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

6. On perusal of the aforesaid provision of law, it appears
that the prosecution has not placed any material that these
petitioners were unauthorizedly betting or gambling. Hence, the
ingredient of section 112 of BNS 2023 is not attracted. The
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.100877/2014
disposed on 13.6.2014 held at paragraph Nos.5 and 6 as
under:

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


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, “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.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


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 be held 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”

7. The Coordinate Bench in Crl.R.P.No.100031 of 2014
disposed on 03.03.2015, held at paragraph Nos.1 to 8 as
under:
This revision petition is filed under Section 397
read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. by the State,
aggrieved by the order passed by the learned
Magistrate in releasing the interim custody of the cash
amount in favour of accused No.2/ respondent No.2.

2. Succinctly stated, the P.S.I. of Honnavar
Police Station charge sheeted the respondents for the
offence punishable under Section 87 of K.P. Act. The

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


accused were on bail. During the raid the
Investigating Officer had seized cash of Rs.34,468/-,
which is alleged to be the gaming money. Respondent
No.2 moved an application under Section 457 of
Cr.P.C. for release of the said amount. The application
was contested by the prosecution. The court below
allowed the application and released the interim
custody of cash amount in favour of the applicant /
respondent No.2 on executing an indemnity bond for
Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum. However,
care was taken by the court below by directing
accused No.1 to assist the C.M.O. of the Court to take
the photographs of the currency notes at his cost.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner – State
submits that the trial Court has lost sight of the fact
that the amount was seized while the accused were
indulged in playing Andar Bahar. In the event
prosecution successfully proves its case, said money is
liable to be confiscated to the State Government. The
court had acted on the fabricated documents produced
by the accused No.2 projecting that the money belong
to Srikumar Roadlines, under whom he was employed.
Though the prosecution had disputed the said
document without probing about the veracity of the
document, the trial Court has hurriedly released the
interim custody of the cash amount. In fact the said
cash amount is required to be marked in evidence
during the trial. The currency notes are not perishable
in nature and there was no dire necessity to release

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


the interim custody of the cash amount in favour of
second applicant. The accused No.5 has pleaded guilty
and was imposed fine, that strengthens the case of
prosecution. In the judgment of this Court reported in
1993 CRL.L.J. 3109 in the case of T.
Narayanaswamy vs. State and Others , it has been
held that release of money seized for the interim
custody is bad in law. Hence, the impugned order is
liable to be set aside.

4. In reply, Sri Anoop G. Deshpande, learned
counsel for R1 to R4 and R6 to R7 submits that the
impugned order being in the nature of interlocutory
order is not amenable to the revision jurisdiction.
Hence, the very petition itself is not maintainable. In
fact, the money seized was not the gaming money,
but it belongs to his employer Srikumar Roadlines and
the court below having satisfied about his contention
was pleased to release the interim custody to his
possession. However, the interest of State is protected
by directing him to execute the indemnity bond for
Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum. Even the
interest of the prosecution about the identification of
the currency notes is also taken care by directing him
to assist the C.M.O. of the Court at his cost in taking
photographs of the currency notes.

5. Respondent No.5 is served and not
represented.

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


6. As regards the first contention about the
maintainability of the revision petition, by a catena of
judicial pronouncements of this Court and other High
Courts, it is held that the release of interim custody of
the seized property is the nature of adjudication of the
rights of the parties in reference to the said property.
The said order is amenable for revision jurisdiction
under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. Hence, there is no merit
in the contention that this petition is not maintainable.

7. As regards the merit of the impugned order
is concerned, the court below being convinced with a
certificate produced by the second applicant issued by
his employer Srikumar Roadlines and also daily
enquiry report dated 14.11.2012 has inferred that he
is an employee of the said Roadlines. Keeping open
the question of the ownership of the seized property /
cash amount in question the court below has ordered
interim custody by taking the photographs of currency
notes and also by calling upon the applicant to
execute the indemnity bond of Rs.50,000/- with one
surety for the likesum.

8. Under the circumstances, I hold that the
impugned has not prejudiced the case of the State
and it is not illegal. The grounds urged by the State
lacks merits and does not call for interference of this
Court. Accordingly, petition is rejected.

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17517
CRL.P No. 104775 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020243702025


8. In the light of the aforesaid extracted judgments
rendered by the Coordinate Benches of this Court and the facts
of the present case which covers the issue on all its force, thus
I deem it appropriate to quash the proceedings qua the
petitioners.
For the aforesaid reasons, the Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER

1. Criminal petition is allowed . The entire proceedings
in C.C.No.473/2025 in connection with Crime No.
11/2025 of Hospete Rural police station, pending on
the file of learned II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,
Hosapete, Vijayanagara District, insofar as the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 14 are hereby quashed.
Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of, as they do not
survive for consideration.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
MN /CT-SK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8