Playing Andar Bahar does not constitute an offence under the Karnataka Police Act.

The petitioner, accused No. 5, sought to quash Crime No. 119/2026, registered by Chittapur Police for an alleged offence under Section 87 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

The complaint alleged that the petitioner and others were playing Andar Bahar for stakes using playing cards; the police reported seizing cash and 52 cards during the raid.

The petitioner denied being present and contended, among other things, that Andar Bahar was not an offence under the Act.

The High Court considered the petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

1. Whether the alleged playing of Andar Bahar constituted an offence under Section 87 of the Karnataka Police Act.

2. Whether the proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS as an abuse of process.

Section 528 of the BNSS preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

The case was registered under Section 87 of the Karnataka Police Act.

The Court relied on E. Eranna v. State of Karnataka, 1977 SCC OnLine Kar 57, which it cited for the proposition that playing Andar Bahar does not amount to a game of chance and that the prosecution must establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offence.

It also relied on the coordinate Bench’s order in Nitin Raj v. State of Karnataka, Crl.P. No. 3688/2026, and the Division Bench’s order dated 14 February 2022 in W.P. No. 18703/2021 and connected matters, which declared Sections 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9 of the Karnataka Police Act ultra vires.

The Court treated the petitioner’s factual denial of presence at the scene as a matter requiring evidence at trial.

However, it accepted the legal contention that the alleged game of Andar Bahar was not an offence under the Karnataka Police Act, relying on the cited decisions and the Division Bench ruling concerning specified provisions of that Act.

It concluded that continuing the proceedings against the petitioner on the alleged facts would amount to an abuse of process, warranting the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS.