Heard Sri K. Ajith Reddy, learned counsel representing Smt v. Sanjana

0f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be. pleased to stay q, further_p_roceedings iniiroing the appeaianc"-or'in" Petitioner/Accused No.8 in STb No.s1i ot-iozz in crime No. 21t2o23 dt.26.02.2023 0f ps verdanda, Nagarkurnoot, on ine fire of the HoN,BLE spl JUDIcIAL sEcoND-cLASS MAGTSTRATE AT KALWAxunrHi,' -oll,i"", registered U/Sec.9(i) TSGA This Petitiori coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sMT vERosE SANJANA ,Advocate for the petitioner and the E.GANESH Assistant pubric Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 and of None Appeared for the Respondent No. 2 , The Court made the following: ORDER (' THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 15822 of 20124 ORDER: This criminal Petition is hled seeking the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.g in STC.No.S17 of 2023 on the file of the learned Special .Iudicial Magistrate of Second Class, Kalwakurthy, registered for the offences punishable under Section 9(i) of the T.S. Gaming Act,

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 26.02.2023, at around 6:0O pm, respondent No.2 received credible information about illegal gambling activity near the Indian Gas Agency in Veldanda village. Along with his staff, he rushed to the scene and caught two. individuals, Bokkala Srisailam and Basunamoni Srisailam, who were playing 3_ card games with betting money. Eight others escaped. Upon inquiry, the two arrested individuals revealed their details and surrenderi:d Rs. 3,9OO, two cell phones, and two Honda Shine bikes. Further investigation led to the seizure of Rs.7,gOO/_, 1O4 plastic piaying cards, and six bikes. TWo parnchas, 2 sKti,J Ctl.P.No. LSE22 of 2024 Badhepally Mallaiah and Basunamoni Srinu, were summoned to witness the seizure and confession of the accused. A case was subsequently f-rled at the police station based on the panchanama.

3. Heard Sri K. Ajith Reddy, learned counsel representing Smt. V. Sanjana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petiLioner as well as Sri E. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. karned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as accused No.8 in the subject crime, which is a clear abuse of the process of law and that the charge sheet lacks specifrc allegations against the petitioner, and the three witnesses cited are all official witnesses. Furthermore, the investigation has yielded nothing but a panchanama with a confession from co-accused individuals.. He further submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person with no prior criminal history, and the respondents have foisted a false case with vague allegations and that a cursory examination of the charge sheet reveals that there are no overt acts attributed to the petitioner, and the entire case rests on flimsy grounds. He contended that sKs,J Crl-P.flo.15422 of 2024 the petitioner's livelihood as a private teacher is precarious, and they have sigrrihcant family responsibilities. Subjecting him to a trial on fabricated charges would cause irreparable harm to his family members. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, stating that the scene of the offence is said to. be located behind the Indian Gas Agency. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that it is not a public street. Whether it is a public street or a private place has to be decided by the trial Court after adducing evidence. Therefore, at this stage, the quashing of proceedings against the petitioner does not arise, and he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In light of the submissions made by both learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, the primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the location in question is neither a public street nor a thoroughfare, nor is it an area of ingress or egress accessible..to the public. According to the prosecution, the 4 sKs,J Ctl-P.No -15822 of 2024 .-\c.-5 .\ \1\l alleged scene of the offence is situated behind the Indian Gas Agency, specifically within agricultural fields and behind the Indian Gas Godown.

7. It is noteworthy that the charge sheet filed by the police does not contain any allegation that villagers lodged complaints about the alleged gaming activity. Instead, the case was registered suo motu. The main allegation against the petitioner is that the accused were playing a garne by betting, for which the case was registered under Section 9(l) of the Gaming Act.

8. Section 9(1) of the Gaming Act reads as follows "9. (I) Whoever is found gaming or reasonably suspected to be gaming in any public street or thoroughfare or in any place to which the public have, or are permitted to have access, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with a fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both."

9. From the above provision, it is evident that when the Police register a case under Section 9(1) of the Gaming Act, they are required to prove that the alleged gaming occurred in a public street, thoroughfare, or a place accessible to the public. However, the prosecution has not established that the 4 ,, f,' ri11#i: - .!ti 5 SKS,J crl-P.No.1St22 of 2024 location in question is a public place where inconvenience could be caused to the public. As such, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of the process of law and the same are liable to be quashed.

10. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in STC.No.8l l of 2023 on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of Second Class, Kalwakurthy, are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/. T. JAYASREE DEPUTY REGISTRAR ,ir\ \\ ; decrroru oFFrcER

1. The SPL Judicial Second-Class Magistrate At Kalwakurthy, Nagarkarnool District

2. The Station House Officer, Veldhanda, Police Station, Veldhanda, Nagarkarnool District

3. One CC to SMT VEROSE SANJANA Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] S.Two CD Copies o PSL I HIGH COURT OATEDi28l03l2025 ,/ /i;," f/r't, €T .$" \ >) -a'.:' !. 2;;L-- ORDER CRLP.No.15822 ot 2024 ALLOWING THE THE CRIMINAL PETITION {