Karnataka HC Quashes BNS 112 Case Against 14 Accused Over Andar Bahar, Finding No Material Of Unauthorised Gambling

In brief

The question

Whether the prosecution material disclosed the elements of petty organised crime under Section 112 BNS, particularly unauthorised betting or gambling.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings in C.C. No. 473/2025, arising from Crime No. 11/2025 of Hosapete Rural Police Station, insofar as they concerned accused Nos. 1 to 14.

It also directed

Pending interlocutory applications were disposed of as no longer surviving.

01Facts

On 15 January 2025, police received information that persons were playing Andar Bahar in a forest area near Ingaligi village.

pp. 5–7

During a raid, police apprehended four persons, seized ₹8,200 and 52 playing cards, and registered Crime No. 11/2025 under Section 112 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

pp. 5–7

After investigation, a charge sheet was filed and C.C. No. 473/2025 was pending before the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosapete.

pp. 5–7

Fourteen accused petitioned to quash the proceedings, arguing that the prosecution material did not establish unauthorised betting or gambling.

pp. 5–7

02Issues

i.Whether the prosecution material disclosed the elements of petty organised crime under Section 112 BNS, particularly unauthorised betting or gambling.

pp. 7–8

ii.Whether the proceedings in C.C. No. 473/2025 should be quashed as against the petitioners.

p. 14

03Law Applied

Section 112(1) BNS defines petty organised crime to include an act of unauthorised betting or gambling committed by a member of a group or gang, singly or jointly; Section 112(2) prescribes its punishment.

p. 8

The Court relied on the Karnataka High Court decisions in Chickarangappa & Others v. State of Mysore, 1971 (2) Mys. L.J. 187, and Eranna v. State of Karnataka, 1977 (1) K.L.J. 274, as cited in a Coordinate Bench decision, for the proposition that Andar Bahar had been treated as a game of skill rather than a game of chance, and that the game’s nature and the accused’s participation in a game of chance must be established to make out the relevant gaming offence.

pp. 8–10

The Court also referred to a Coordinate Bench decision in Crl. P. No. 100877/2014, disposed of on 13 June 2014.

pp. 8–10

Provisions in the judgment · 9 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482 Section 397 Section 401 Section 457

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 112

KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963. Section 79 Section 80 Section 87

04Reasoning

The complaint and seizure panchanama described the activity only as Andar Bahar.

pp. 7–8

The prosecution had not placed material showing that the petitioners were engaged in unauthorised betting or gambling, or otherwise establishing the relevant ingredients of Section 112 BNS.

pp. 7–8

Applying the cited decisions concerning Andar Bahar, the Court concluded that the mere reference to the game and seizure of cash and cards did not, without supporting material, establish the offence alleged.

pp. 8–10

It therefore found that Section 112 BNS was not attracted on the material before it.

p. 8

05Holding

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings in C.C. No. 473/2025, arising from Crime No. 11/2025 of Hosapete Rural Police Station, insofar as they concerned accused Nos. 1 to 14.

p. 14

Pending interlocutory applications were disposed of as no longer surviving.

p. 14

LawLens.Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF