Crown Prosecutor vs Abdul Wahab and Another

Lakshmana Rao, J.—This is an appeal by the Provincial Government against the acquittal of the respondents of an offence u/s 37, Clause (3), Madras City Police Act. Respondent 2 is the clerk of respondent 1 and the prosecution case is that on information that respondent 1 was receiving bets on horse races in the Suparikunta in Badai Sahib Street, P.W. 1, the Sub-Inspector sent P.W. 2 with a slip, Ex. B-2, containing the names of horses and four annas. P.W. 2 handed over the slip and cash to respondent 1 and respondent 1 retained the cash and passed the slip to respondent 2. Respondent 2 wrote something over the slips and gave them to respondent 1 and respondent 1 returned one slip, Ex. A, to P.W. 2. The Sub-Inspector rushed to the place and ten betting slips, Ex. B series, an acceptance form Ex. c and fifteen annas in cash were found on respondent l. Respondent 2 had M.O. 2, the pencil, on him and Ex. A, the betting slip, was with P.W. 2. These facts are spoken to by P.Ws. 1 and 2 who were not seriously cross-examined, and the search witnesses could have been examined by the Magistrate if necessary. The evidence of D.ws. 1 and 2 is not entitled to any weight and on the evidence respondent 1 would be guilty u/s 87, Clause (3), Madras City Police Act. Respondent 2 was not found gaming as defined in the Act and he would not be guilty of the offence. The acquittal of respondent 1 is therefore set aside and he is convicted u/s 37, Clause (8), Madras City Police Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Bs. 5 with simple imprisonment for one week in default. The acquittal of respondent 2 is correct and the appeal is dismissed as against him.