Karnataka HC Quashes Gambling Proceedings Against 7 Accused In Andar Bahar Raid, Following Earlier Police Act Rulings

In brief

The question

1. Whether the allegations that the petitioners were playing *andar bahar*, together with the seizure of cash and cards, disclosed offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4955 of 2025, insofar as they concerned accused Nos. 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 11 and 12, for the offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act and Section 112(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

It also directed

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, were dismissed.

01Facts

On 21 October 2025, police raided the first floor of Sai Madura Tiffins Shop after receiving information that persons were playing cards. They arrested twelve persons and seized ₹8,720 and 52 playing cards. A case was registered under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, and Section 112(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; after investigation, a charge-sheet was filed.

pp. 3–4

The petitioners, arrayed as accused Nos. 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 11 and 12, sought to quash the proceedings under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

pp. 3–4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the allegations that the petitioners were playing *andar bahar*, together with the seizure of cash and cards, disclosed offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

pp. 4–6

ii.2. Whether the proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in light of the cited precedents concerning *andar bahar*.

pp. 5–8, 12

03Law Applied

Section 2(3) of the Karnataka Police Act defines a “common gaming house” by reference to a place where gaming instruments are kept or used for the profit or gain of the person owning, occupying or keeping the place, or of the person using it.

pp. 6–7

The Court relied on *Chickarangappa v. State of Mysore* (1971 (2) Mys. L.J. 187) and *Eranna v. State of Karnataka* (1977 (1) K.L.J. 274), as discussed in the cited decisions, for the proposition that *andar bahar* is a game of skill and not merely a game of chance, and that playing it does not, without more, establish offences under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act.

pp. 7–8

The Court also referred to a previous decision of the High Court quashing proceedings against other accused in the same case.

p. 12

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

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963. Section 2 Section 79 Section 80 Section 87

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 112

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

04Reasoning

The prosecution alleged that the petitioners were playing *andar bahar* and relied on the cash and cards seized during the raid. Applying the cited precedents, the Court treated *andar bahar* as a game of skill rather than a game of chance and concluded that the alleged play did not attract Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act.

pp. 7–8

It considered the earlier quashing of proceedings against other accused in the same case and held that proceedings should likewise be quashed insofar as these petitioners were concerned.

p. 12