HC to aid of Sangrur lottery winner

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 4

When Surjit Singh Kheri won a Maruti car on a lottery ticket almost two decades back, little did he know that troubles would come accelerating. The Sangrur man was booked and eventually convicted by a court before a fine of Rs 3,000 was imposed. Coming to his rescue, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has not only acquitted him, but also has laid down the law on the issue.

Justice Suvir Sehgal ruled a lottery winner, who purchased a ticket by making one-time payment of a certain specified amount, could not be proceeded against under the provisions of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act.

Kheri, along with three others, was convicted in March 2006 by the Sangrur Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 5 of the Act. He, and other accused, filed three separate appeals before the Sessions Court. After examining the evidence and material produced by the prosecution, the court in October 2010 found that the prosecution had not been able to establish the guilt of co-accused while setting aside their conviction and sentence. The court, at the same time, found that the prosecution had established its case against the petitioner beyond all reasonable doubts and affirmed the findings of the trial court.

The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told the allegations in the FIR were that secret information was received by a Sub-Inspector that some persons were running a lottery. The lucky draw was held in March 2000. Each ticket was worth Rs 100 and the first prize was of Maruti car. It was alleged that the accused defrauded innocents and the prizes were drawn in the names of persons known to them. After the registration of the FIR, a raid was conducted.

The Maruti car was produced by the petitioner, which was taken into possession during investigation. The charges were framed against the petitioner and three others. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Justice Sehgal asserted a perusal of the definition of “money circulation schemes”, “prize chits” and Section 5 of the Act clearly established that the offence alleged against the petitioner was not made out. Participating in a lottery and being a winner of the prize did not fall within the ambit of the provisions of the Act.

“The allegation against the petitioner is not of printing or publishing any ticket or selling or distributing it or of advertising it or of permitting any person to use his premises for the purpose of promotion of prize chits or money circulation schemes. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, can it be said that the petitioner is guilty of the offence under Section 5 of the Act.,” Justice Sehgal added.