2015 (8) TMI 1570 - SCH - Indian Laws

Acquittal of petitioner in the prosecution launched by the respondents - involvement in Gambling or not - HELD THAT - The petitioner confirms that the trial court passed an order on 11th October, 2014 acquitting the petitioner in the prosecution launched by the respondents. The prosecution case was that the members of the petitioner were indulging in Mangatha ulle, velliye by betting money for profit. There is no allegation whatsoever that the members of the petitioner or other persons were playing rummy (13 cards) in the premises of the petitioner. Under the circumstances, petitioner says that since the prosecution was not based on the petitioner or any of its members playing rummy (13 cards), he would like to withdraw the writ petition that was filed before the Madras High Court being WP No.21620 of 2011. We permit him to withdraw the writ petition. Since the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, the observations made by the High Court in the writ petition or in the writ appeal filed by the State do not survive - SLP dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Acquittal of the petitioner in a prosecution case.
2. Withdrawal of writ petition filed before the Madras High Court.
3. Dismissal of special leave petition as infructuous.
4. Dismissal of multiple petitions as withdrawn.
5. Substitution of petitioner's name in a specific case.
6. Dismissal of a petition for non-prosecution.

Acquittal of the petitioner in a prosecution case:
The trial court acquitted the petitioner on 11th October, 2014, in a prosecution case where the allegation was that the petitioner's members were involved in betting money for profit, not playing rummy. As there was no accusation of playing rummy (13 cards) by the petitioner or its members, the senior counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition filed before the Madras High Court (WP No.21620 of 2011), which was permitted by the court. Consequently, the observations made by the High Court in the writ petition or in the writ appeal filed by the State were declared to be no longer valid.

Dismissal of special leave petition as infructuous:
Given the acquittal of the petitioner in the prosecution case and the withdrawal of the writ petition, the special leave petition was deemed infructuous and subsequently dismissed by the court.

Dismissal of multiple petitions as withdrawn:
Several petitions, including W.P.(C) No.1060/2013, 1073/2013, 402/2014, 200/2014, and SLP(C) No.15568/2015, were sought to be withdrawn by the petitioners' counsel, and permission was granted. Consequently, these petitions were dismissed as withdrawn by the court.

Substitution of petitioner's name in a specific case:
In W.P.(C) No.1061/2013, the court allowed the substitution of the petitioner's name from M/s. Darkhorse Farm & Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. to Vidura Games Private Limited. Subsequently, the counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition, which was granted, leading to the dismissal of the petition as withdrawn.

Dismissal of a petition for non-prosecution:
In W.P.(C) No. 859/2014, where no appearance was made on behalf of the petitioner, the petition was dismissed for non-prosecution by the court. Additionally, all pending applications in these matters were disposed of by the court.