Karnataka High Court
Shri Ramchandra Vittal Hegde vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 May, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
CRL.P No. 101883 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MAY 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101883 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. RAMCHANDRA VITTAL HEGDE,
AGE: 73 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
2. SHRI. MANJUNATH SUBRAYA HEGDE,
AGE: 69 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
3. SHRI. KESHAV MAHABALESHWAR HEGDE,
Digitally signed by AGE: 73 YEARS,
VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI OCC: AGRICULTURE,
Location: High R/O: ONIKERI, SIRSI,
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench, UTTARA KANNADA,
Dharwad
KARNATAKA - 581 318.
4. SHRI MANJUNATH RAMCHANDRA HEGDE,
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: NIRANALLI, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
5. SHRI. MAHESH RAMCHANDRA HEGDE,
AGE: 48 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
CRL.P No. 101883 of 2025
R/O: BELAGADDE, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
6. SHRI. NARAYAN VENKATRAMAN HEGDE,
AGE: 60 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: NIRANALLI, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
7. SHRI. VINAY MAHABALESWAR HEGDE,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
8. SHRI. KAMALAKAR MADHUKESHWAR BHAT,
AGE: 73 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: YADALLI, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 340.
9. SHRI. ANAND MANJUNATH HEGDE,
AGE: 53 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
10. SHRI. MANJUNATH SATYANARAYAN HEGE,
AGE: 60 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ANDALLI, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 358
11. SHRI. GANAPATI SHANTARAM HEGDE,
AGE: 54 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
CRL.P No. 101883 of 2025
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
12. SHRI. MAHABALESWAR SHRIPATI HEGDE,
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: BELAGADDE, SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
13. SHRI. KARTIK GANAPATI HEGDE,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ITAGULI , SIRSI,
UTTARA KANNADA,
KARNATAKA - 581 336.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SOURABH HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
R/BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
THROUGH SIRSI RURAL PS,
SIRSI - 581 401.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C R/W 528 OF BNSS, SEEKING TO QUASHING THE FIR DATED
09.04.2025 IN CRIME NO.43/2025 REGISTERED WITH THE SIRSI
RURAL PS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 79 AND
80 OF K.P.ACT. PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DIV) AND JMFC., COURT, SIRSI, UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
CRL.P No. 101883 of 2025
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for
the respondent-State.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
3. The petitioners are before this Court calling in
question the registration of the First Information Report, dated
09.04.2025, in Crime No.43/2025 registered with the Sirsi Rural
Police Station, Sirsi Circle, for the offences punishable under
Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
facts involved in this petition is squarely covered by the decision
of this Court in the case of Eranna & Ors. Vs. State of
Karnataka1, which is subsequently relied by Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in several criminal petitions. One such petition is
Crl. P. No.100877/2014, [ Ramakrishna & Others Vs. The State
of Karnataka and Another, disposed of on 13.06.2014 ]. The Co-
1977(1) Kar.L.J. 274
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
ordinate Bench, in its order passed in the above criminal petition,
at paragraphs 5 and 6 has held as under:
"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. 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
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7200
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".
5. In the light of the decision of this Court rendered in
the case of Eranna & Ors. (supra), the issue stands resolved and
no more an res integra, and this Court deems it appropriate to
quash the proceedings qua the petitioners herein.
6. For the reasons aforementioned, the following:
ORDER
i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
ii) The FIR, dated 09.04.2025, in Crime No.43/2025
registered with the Sirsi Rural Police Station as
against the petitioners herein is hereby quashed.
iii) Any materials belonging to the accused/petitioners
herein, if seized, shall be released in accordance with
law.
_________Sd/-_________
JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
KMS, CT-ASC
