Delhi District Court
State vs Marippa on 30 March, 2026
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-07,
CENTRAL, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Presided over by- Ms. Preeti Rajoria, DJS
Cr. C No. 12589/2022
CNR No.: DLCT020429102022
FIR No. 5/2022
PS. Subzi Mandi
u/S 12 Delhi Public Gambling Act
STATE VS. MARIPPA & ANR.
1) The date of commission of offence : 02.01.2022
2) The name of the complainant : ASI Sukesh Kumar
3) The name & parentage of accused : Marippa, S/o Karpan, R/o
H. No. 11, Madrasi Colony,
Mori Gate, Delhi and Karan
@ Laddu S/o Sh. Laxman,
R/o H. No. 11, Madrasi
Colony, Mori Gate, Delhi
4) Offence complained of : Section 12 Delhi Public
Gambling Act, 1955
5) Offence charged with : Section 12 Delhi Public
Gambling Act, 1955.
6) The plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
7) Final order : Acquittal
8) Date of Institution : 07.09.2022
9) Order reserved on : 13.03.2026
10) Order announced on : 30.03.2026
Digitally signed
by PREETI
PREETI RAJORIA
RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30
18:42:15 +0530
Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 1/13
FINAL ORDER
1.The case of the prosecution against the accused Marippa and Karan is that on 02.01.2022 at about 10.15 pm, near Pul Mithai, Tis Hazari, Delhi within the jurisdiction of P.S. Subzi Mandi, accused was found in possession of one diary, a pen and currency notes amounting to Rs. 5200/-, chits and carbon paper, which were seized vide seizure memo and in contravention of provision of Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955.
2. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused u/S 12 of the Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955. The copy of charge-sheet was supplied to the accused in compliance of Section 207 CrPC. Thereafter, charge was framed against the accused under Section 12 of Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955 on 05.04.2025, to which he had pleaded not guilty and opted to face trial.
3. In support of its version, prosecution has examined three witnesses. Vide separate statement of the accused recorded u/S 294 CrPC on 21.05.2025, accused had admitted the genuineness of registration of the present FIR, without admitting to its contents. Resultantly, the corresponding witnesses were dropped from the list of witnesses on 21.05.2025.
4. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused was recorded separately wherein accused claimed to be innocent and denied the allegations against him. Accused opted not to lead any defence evidence.
5. I have heard Ld. APP for State and Ld. Defence Counsel for accused. I have also perused the record carefully.
6. The testimonies of prosecution witnesses are being touched upon, in brief, as follows:-
PW-1 ASI Suksh Kumar, has deposed that on 02.01.2022, when he was posted as ASI at PS Sabzi Mandi, and was present at Police Post at Sabzi Mandi, Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA Date:
RAJORIA 2026.03.30 18:42:25 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 2/13 and was on a patrolling duty along with Ct. Utsav, in area patrolling on foot vide DD. No. 12 PP (already Ex. A4), while patrolling when they reached near mithai pul, Tis Hazari, they met one secret informer, who informed them that two unknown persons playing cards, i.e., gambling and if raid is conducted both the said unknown person can be caught red handed. Thereafter, PW ASI Sukesh Kumar formed one raiding team including Ct. Utsav and he also tried to join 4- 5 public person as witness, however, none of them agreed to join the investigation citing their personal difficulties and left the spot without their name and identities and due to which he could not serve any notice to any public person. Without wasting time, at about 10:15 pm, they went to Mithai Pul and saw that on the side of the road and saw that one truck was parked and two unknown persons doing gambling (Satta Parchi). Thereafter, he signaled Ct. Utsav and handed over to him one hundred rupee note having its no. OEA 865884, and instructed him to bid at 49 number for Rs. 100 and accordingly, Ct. Utsav noted down his above said number and in the meantime suddenly we caught red handed the person who was writing the chit as well as the other person who was taking the money and apprehended both the person. The identity of the both the apprehended person were revealed as Marippa and Karan. One diary was recovered from accused Marippa who was preparing the chit in the said diary, there were two carbon already affixed as well as five written chits which were used for gambling were found present and from his right hand, one white colour pen was also recovered. It has been further deposed that during the personal search of other accused Karan, Rs. 5,200/- were recovered from his right side pocket of pants worn by him and in the said recovered currency, above stated hundred rupee note was also included.
It has been further deposed that thereafter, the recovered pen/carbon copy and written chits were duly seized by him and all the recovered items were put in one transparent plastic box and one pullanda was prepared by him and the said Digitally signed by PREETI RAJORIA PREETI Date:
RAJORIA 2026.03.30
18:42:33
+0530
Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 3/13
pullanda was sealed with the seal of 'SK', and was number Sr. No. 1. That the above stated currency notes including the one hundred rupee note was separately sealed by him and pullanda was prepared and he numbers it as Sr. No. 2. That the hundred rupee note was separately sealed and pullanda was prepared and was given number Sr. No. 3. It has been further deposed that the thereafter he separately sealed the chit whereby Ct. Utsav had requrested for the bid at 49 number and prepared the pullanda and numbered it Sr. No. 4. That the seal was handed over to Ct. Utsav after use.
It has been further deposed that thereafter, he prepared the rukka and handed over the same to Ct. Utsav for registration of FIR at the PS, and accordingly, he went to the PS, got the FIR registered and returned to the spot along with ASI Rakesh. The rukka is Ex. PW-1/A. He handed over the accused persons along with the recovered case property to the IO alongwith relevant documents prepared by him prior to registration of FIR. The seizure memo of One hundred rupee note, cash amount of Rs. 5100/-, written chits and recovered diary along with carbon paper and 5 chits are Ex. PW-1/B, PW-1/C, PW-1/D and PW-1/E, respectively.
Accused persons and the case property were correctly identified by the witness before the Court. Witness was duly cross examined by the learned defence counsel.
PW-2 Ct. Utsav Dhama has deposed that on 02.01.2022, when he was posted as Constable at Police Post, PS Sabzi Mandi, he along with ASI Sukesh Kumar were on area patrolling on foot vide DD. No. 12 PP (already Ex. A4) and while patrolling, when they reached near mithai pul, Tis Hazari, they met one secret informer, who informed them that two unknown persons playing cards, i.e., gambling and if raid is conducted both the said unknown person can be caught red handed. Thereafter, IO formed one raiding team including him and Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:42:41 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 4/13 IO also tried to join 4- 5 public person as witness, however, none of them agreed to join the investigation citing their personal difficulties and left the spot without their name and identity due to which, IO could not serve any notice to any public person. Without wasting time, at about 10:15 pm they went to Mithai Pul and saw that on the side of the road one truck was parked and two unknown persons doing gambling (Satta Parchi). Thereafter, IO signaled him and handed over to him one hundred rupee note having its no. OEA 865884, and instructed him to bid at 49 number for Rs. 100 and accordingly, IO noted down the above said number and in the meantime suddenly they caught red handed the person who was writing the chit as well as the other person who was taking the money and apprehended both the person. The identity of the both the apprehended person revealed as Mariyapa and Karan. One diary was recovered from accused Mariyapa who was preparing the chit in the said diary there were two carbon already affixed as well as five written chits which were used for purpose of gambling were found present and on his right hand one white colour pen also recovered. During the personal search of another accused Karan Rs. 5,200/- were recovered from his right side pocket of his wearing pants and in the said recovered currency/Rupees above stated hundred note was also included. Thereafter, the recovered pen/carbon copy and written chits were duly seized by IO and all the recovered items were put by him in one transparent plastic box and one pullanda was prepared by him and the said pullanda was duly sealed by him with the seal of SK. IO gave serial no. 1 to the said pullanda. The above stated recovered currency including the hundred note was separately sealed by IO and pullanda was prepared and he gave them the Sr. No.2. The hundred rupees note was separately sealed and pullanda was prepared and Sr. No. 3 was given to said pullanda. Thereafter, IO separately sealed the chit whereby PW Ct. Utsav requested for bid at 49 number and prepared the pullanda and gave Sr. No.4. The seal after use handed over to him. IO prepared Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:42:50 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 5/13 the rukka u/S 12 of Gambling Act and the same was handed over to him for registration of FIR and accordingly he went to PS and got the FIR registered and after sometime he returned to the spot, with IO/ASI Rakesh.
It is further deposed that IO/ASI Sukesh Kumar handed over the recovered case property and accused to IO/ASI Rakesh along with relevant documents prepared by him prior to registration of FIR. The seizure memo of hundred rupees note, cash amount of 5,100 Rs, written chits and recovered diary along with carbon paper and 5 chits are already Ex. PW-1/B, PW-1/C, PW-1/D & PW-1/E. IO arrested the accused persons namely Marippa and Karan vide arrest memo which are Ex.PW-2/A and Ex.PW-2/B. IO recorded the disclosure statements of both the accused persons namely Marippa and Karan which are Ex.PW-2/C and Ex.PW-2/D. Accused Marippa was correctly identified by the witness before the Court and identity of accused Karan was not disputed by defence counsel. Witness was duly cross examined by the learned defence counsel.
PW-3 ASI Rakesh Kumar has deposed that on 02.01.2022, when he was posted as ASI at Police Post, Tis Hazari, PS Sabzi Mandi, the investigation of the present case was marked to him, after which, he along with Ct. Utsav went to the spot, i.e., Pul Mithai and met with ASI Sukesh Kumar who had handed over the recovered case property and accused to him along with relevant documents prepared by him prior to registration of FIR. The seizure memo of hundred rupees note, cash amount of 5,100 rs, written chits and recovered diary along with carbon paper and 5 chits are already Ex. PW-1/B, PW-1/C, PW-1/D & PW-1/E. It is further deposed that he arrested the accused persons namely Marippa and Karan vide arrest memo which are already Ex.PW-2/A and Ex.PW-2/B and then he recorded the disclosure statements of both the accused persons namely Marippa and Karan which are already Ex.PW-2/C and Ex.PW-2/D. He prepared the site plan at the instance of ASI/ Sukesh Kumar Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:42:57 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 6/13 which is Ex. PW-3/A. He recorded the statement of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.PC. After completion of investigation, he prepared the chargesheet and filed it before the Court. Accused Marippa was correctly identified by the witness before the Court and identity of accused Karan was not disputed by defence counsel. Witness was duly cross examined by the learned defence counsel.
Prosecution evidence, oral and documentary in tabular form is as under:
ORAL EVIDENCE
PW-1 SI Sukesh Kumar (Complainant/ 1st IO)
PW-2 Ct. Utsav Dhama (Police accompanying complainant
on patrolling)
PW-3 ASI Rakesh Kumar (2nd IO)
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
1. Ex. PW-1/A Rukka
2. Ex. PW-1/B Seizure Memo of One Hundred Rupee Note
3. Ex. PW-1/C Seizure Memo of Cash amount of Rs. 5100/-
4. Ex. PW-1/D Written chit /slip given to CT. Utsav for Rs. 100/-
5. Ex. PW-1/E Recovered diary with carbon papers and 5 chits.
6. Ex. PW-2/A Arrest Memo of accused Marippa
7. Ex. PW-2/B Arrest Memo of accused Karan @ Laddu
8. Ex. PW-2/C Disclosure statement of accused Marippa
9. Ex. PW-2/D Disclosure Statement of accused Karan @ Laddu
10. Ex. PW-3/A Site Plan
7. Joint statement of accused persons was recorded u/S 313 CrPC read with Section 281 CrPC on 11.02.2026, in which all the incriminating evidence were put to the accused. Accused have denied the alleged recovery of gambling articles from their possession. Accused opted not to lead any evidence Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:04 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 7/13 in defence.
8. Sh. A.K. Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for the accused persons vehemently argued that the present case is a false one and is based on contradictory facts. He argued that the accused has been illegally framed in the present case and it is evident from the fact that the accused was allegedly apprehended from a public place despite which, there is no public witness to the proceedings. It has been also argued that no CCTV footage of the alleged recovery effected from the accused was obtained and filed with the chargesheet. It has been also submitted that no report from FSL has been called qua the fingerprints of the accused on the recovered case property nor any handwriting sample of the accused taken for comparison with the alleged chits/diary recovered from the possession of the accused. It has been lastly argued that police officials posted at police station conducted the entire proceedings while sitting at police station and same is not trustworthy.
Per contra, Sh. Aman Gaurav, Ld. APP for the State has argued that the public persons did not join the proceedings despite requests. Ld. APP for State has further submitted that the prosecution has been able to successfully prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt by the testimony of the complainant and the testimony of the other witnesses. Further, since the case of the prosecution is corroborated, it has been prayed that accused Marippa and Karan @ Laddu be convicted for the commission of offence u/S 12 of the Delhi Public Gambling Act.
9. At the outset, it pertinent to note that Section 12 of the Delhi Public Gambling Act provides that:
12.Gaming and setting birds and animals to fight in public streets.-A police officer may apprehend without warrant any person found gaming in any public street, place or thoroughfare situated within the Union Territory of Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:11 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 8/13 Delhi, or any person setting any birds or animals to fight in any public street, place or thoroughfare situated within the said Union Territory, or any person there present aiding and abetting such public fighting of birds and animals, such person when apprehended shall be brought without delay before a Magistrate and shall be liable to imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months and shall also be liable to a fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, and such police officer may seize all instruments of gaming found in such public street, place or thoroughfare on the person of those whom he shall so arrest, and the Magistrate may on conviction of the offender order such instruments to be forthwith destroyed.
10. The manner in which the inquiry, seizure and search etc. was stated to be conducted on the spot at the time of apprehension of the accused persons and alleged recovery of the diary, pen. chits, carbon paper and the cash makes the prosecution version highly doubtful. It is evident from the testimony of PWs that accused were apprehended along with the alleged articles at a public place but there is no public witness in the present case. It is not the case of the prosecution that the there were no public persons available at the place of incident. Regarding the importance of joining of independent witness during investigation in a case like the present one, reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case titled Anoop Joshi vs. State 1999(2) C.C. Cases 314 (HC), wherein it has been observed as under:
"18. It is repeatedly laid down by this court that in such cases it should be shown by the police that sincere efforts have been made to join independent witnesses. In the present case, it is evident that no such sincere efforts have been made, particularly when we find that shops were open and one or two shopkeepers could have been persuaded to join the raiding party to witness the recovery being made from the appellant. In case any of the shopkeepers had declined to join the raiding party, the police could have later on taken legal action against Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:19 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 9/13 such shopkeepers because they could not have escaped the rigours of law while declining to perform their legal duty to assist the police in investigation as a citizen, which is an offence under the IPC".
It is pertinent to note that the names of the persons to whom the request was made to join the investigation has nowhere been mentioned in the chargesheet nor any written notice in this regard has been placed on record which must have been given to the public persons. In absence of the same, mere deposition that public person refused to join the investigation as they left before providing their names and addresses, is of no avail. A police officer conducting investigation of a crime is entitled to ask anybody to join the investigation and on refusal by a person from the public the Investigating Officer can take action against such a person under the law. Had it been a fact that the witnesses from the public had refused to join the investigation, the IO must have proceeded against them under the relevant provision of law. The failure to do so by the police officer is suggestive of the fact that the explanation for non- joining the witnesses from the public is an after-thought and is not worthy of credence. All these facts taken together make the prosecution case highly doubtful.
11. Further, after sealing the case property, the seal is stated to have been handed over to Ct. Utsav, however, no handing over memo has been filed along with the chargsheet nor referred to by either of the PWs. It appears that no effort was made to hand over the seal after use to an independent person. More importantly, it is imperative to note that there is no taking over memo on record to show as to when the seal was taken back by PW ASI Sukesh from Ct. Utsav. I am conscious of precedent laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case titled Safiullah vs. State, 1993 (1) RCR (Criminal) 622, that:
"10. The seals after use were kept by the police officials themselves. Therefore, the possibility of tampering with the Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:26 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 10/13 contents of the sealed parcel cannot be ruled out. It was very essential for the prosecution to have established from stage to stage the fact that the sample was not tampered with. Once a doubt is created in the preservation of the sample the benefit of the same should go to the accused."
Emphasis is also laid on the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case titled Ramji Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 452, wherein it has been observed that:
"7. The very purpose of giving seal to an independent person is to avoid tampering of the case property. It is well settled that till the case property is not dispatched to the forensic science laboratory, the seal should not be available to the prosecuting agency and in the absence of such a safeguard the possibility of seal, contraband and the samples being tampered with cannot be ruled out. In the present case, the seal of Investigating Officer-Hoshiar Singh bearing impression HS was available with Maha Singh, a junior police official and that of Deputy Superintendent of Police remained with Deputy Superintendent of Police himself. Therefore, the possibility of tampering with seals as well as seized contraband and samples cannot be ruled out."
From the facts as deposed by the witnesses, it can be presumed that the seal remained in possession of PW Ct. Utsav, who by virtue of being posted in the same police station in the malkhana of which the case property was lying, had ample opportunity for tampering with case property. Hence, considering the legal position, the benefit of doubt accrues in favour of the accused and another fatal dent is made to the story of the prosecution.
Digitally signed by PREETIPREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:33 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 11/13
12. Furthermore, it is pertinent to note that no specimen signatures of the accused were taken by the IO for comparison with the writings found in the diary and chits recovered from the possession of the accused. Reason for not doing the same has nowhere been mentioned and is best known to the IO. Needless to say that a diary/chit is not sufficient for proving a case of prosecution as to gamble.
13. Lastly, in the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case titled as S. L. Goswami vs. State of M.P" 1972 CRI.L.J.511(SC), it has been held:-
"...... In our view, the onus to proving all the ingredients of an offence is always upon the prosecution and at no stage does it shift to the accused. It is no part of the prosecution duty to somehow hook the crook. Even in cases where the defence of the accused does not appear to be credible or is palpably false that burden does not become any the less. It is only when this burden is discharged that it will be for the accused to explain or controvert the essential elements in the prosecution case, which would negative it. It is not however for the accused even at the initial stage to prove something which has to be eliminated by the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence with which he is charged, and even if the onus shifts upon the accused and the accused has to establish his plea, the standard of proof is not the same as that which rests upon the prosecution ..."
In a criminal trial, the onus and duty to prove the case against the accused is upon the prosecution and the prosecution must establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. It is also a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that if there is a reasonable doubt with regard to the guilt of the accused the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt resulting in acquittal of the accused.
In view of the aforesaid discussion and in my considered opinion, the prosecution has been unable to bring home the guilt of accused u/S Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date:
2026.03.30 18:43:41 +0530 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 12/13 12 of the Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955. The alleged recovery of the diary, chits, pen and cash amount of Rs. 5200/- from the accused persons at the spot as alleged, which was the essential ingredient of the offence, is highly doubtful.
Further, the accused have been able to raise doubts with respect to the possibility of tampering with the case property. Thus, the accused are entitled for benefit of reasonable doubt and is hereby found not guilty. Accordingly, accused Marippa and Karan @ Laddu are acquitted of the charge levelled against them u/S 12 Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955.
It is certified that this judgment contains 13 pages and each and every page has been signed by me. Digitally signed PREETI by PREETI RAJORIA RAJORIA Date: 2026.03.30 Announced in the open court 18:43:49 +0530 on 30.03.2026.
(PREETI RAJORIA) JMFC-07/Central/ THC Delhi/30.03.2026 Cr. C No. 12589/2022 PS Subzi Mandi FIR No. 5/2022 State vs. Marippa & Anr. 13/13