Karnataka HC Refers Andar Bahar Legality to Larger Bench
The Karnataka High Court has referred to a larger Bench the question of whether the card game Andar Bahar is a game of skill or a game of chance under the Karnataka Police Act. Hearing a petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings against individuals accused of playing the game for money, Justice Suraj Govindaraj raised doubts about the correctness of a 1977 judgment that has long been cited to treat the card game as one involving skill.
Andar Bahar involves players placing bets on whether a card matching a designated card will appear first on the side designated as "Andar" or the side called "Bahar." The legal precedent dates back to the Karnataka High Court ruling in E. Eranna v. State of Karnataka, where 14 persons accused of playing the game were acquitted after the court held that the prosecution failed to prove Andar Bahar was a game of chance.
Justice Govindaraj expressed strong reservations regarding that interpretation, reasoning that once the cards are shuffled and the deck is prepared, the sequence in which the cards emerge is entirely outside the control or decision-making skill of the players. Based on this observation, the judge took the view that Andar Bahar is a game of chance, but determined that a larger Bench must reconsider the issue due to the direct conflict with the earlier E. Eranna ruling.
The reference arose during proceedings challenging a police case filed under Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act. According to prosecutors, police received credible information on August 15, 2020, that 10 to 20 people were gambling for money at a house named Mount Villa, located behind Pakshikere Church in Tokkuru village of Mangaluru taluk.
A police team conducted a raid at the premises at approximately 12.15 a.m. on August 16, 2020. Officers allegedly caught the accused, including the petitioners, playing Andar Bahar with stakes involved, seizing Rs 7,63,815 in cash, 16 mobile phones, playing cards, and seven vehicles before initiating criminal proceedings.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate M. R. Balakrishna argued that Andar Bahar should be treated as a game of skill and therefore remains outside the purview of Sections 79 and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act. Citing the E. Eranna judgment, counsel contended that the mere presence of betting or wagering movable property does not convert a game of skill into one of chance.
Following the hearing, the High Court directed the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice for the constitution of an appropriate larger Bench to resolve the legal question.
