While dismissing an application seeking quashing of the proceedings initiated under the Public Gambling Act, the Allahabad High Court has held that Section13 authorizes a police officer to arrest any person without warrant and the police can investigate the matter without prior permission of the Magistrate under section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C.

The High Court was considering an application filed under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in a case registered under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867, as well as the chargesheet and the Summoning order.

The Single Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh held, “Section 13 of the Gambling Act authorise a police officer to arrest any person without warrant, therefore, it cannot be said that Section 13 of the Gambling Act is a non-cognizable offence and police cannot investigate the matter without prior permission of the learned Magistrate under section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C.”

Advocate Diwan Saifullah Khan represented the Applicant while Government Advocate represented the Oppostite Party.

Factual Background

A First Information Report (FIR) was lodged in 2019 under Section 13 of the Gambling Act. It was alleged by the informant that the applicant and co-accused were arrested by the police while playing cards in the park, and Rs 750 was recovered from their possession. The Investigating Officer started an investigation and recorded statements of the informant and other witnesses, and submitted a chargesheet. The Magistrate took cognisance of the offence.

Arguments

It was the case of the applicant that Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. mandates that no Police Officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. It was submitted that since in the present case, the police did not take permission from the Magistrate to commence with the investigation, thus, the entire proceedings became void ab initio.

Reasoning

The Bench explained that the State of U.P. had enhanced the sentence in Section 13 of the Gambling Act in the year 1961 by bringing the State Amendment through U.P. Act no.21 of 1961 in the Gambling Act whereby the punishment was enhanced. Accordingly, for a first offence, the offender may have to pay a fine between Rs 50 and 250 and may be awarded rigorous imprisonment for upto one month. For any later offences, the maximum fine shall be 500 rupees and the offender may be awarded rigorous imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months nor less than one month.

The Bench noticed that Section 13 of the Gambling Act starts with "a police officer may apprehend without warrant-" and this meant that the police officer may arrest any person without obtaining warrant from any court. Highlighting the difference between cognizable offence and non-cognizable offences, the Bench stated that in a case of cognizable offences, a police officer may arrest any person without warrant whereas in non-cognizable offence a police officer has no right to arrest without warrant.

The Bench also made it clear that Section 13 of the Gambling Act authorises a police officer to arrest any person without warrant thereby making it a cognizable offence.“The FIR may be registered under Section 13 of the Gambling Act and the police has authority to register the FIR and investigate the matter and the learned Magistrate did not commit any illegality or irregularity in taking cognizance of offence on police report. Therefore, the present application lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed”, the Bench asserted.

Thus, dismissing the application, the Bench directed the Trial Court to conclude the trial, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months.

Cause Title: Kamran v. State of U.P. and Another (Case No. Application u/s 528 BNSS No. - 43373 of 2025)

Click here to read/download Order


Allahabad High CourtJustice Vivek Kumar Singh

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.