EXCEPTION IN FAVOUR OF GAMES OF SKILL
Section 12 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867, states that games of mere skill are exempt from
the application of the Act. The Supreme Court of India, has interpreted the phrase "games of
mere skill" to mean games where there is a predominance of skill. In the case of State of
Andhra Pradesh V. K. Satyanarayana, AIR 1968 SC 825, the Supreme Court defined a 'game of
mere skill' to mean a game "in which, although the element of chance necessarily cannot be
entirely eliminated, success depends principally upon the superior knowledge, training,
attention, experience and adroitness of the player." By application of this definition, it
held that the game of "rummy" was a game of skill, and did not amount to gambling under the
Public Gambling Act. The Court reasoned:"Rummy..... requires certain amount of skill because
the fall of the cards has to be memorised and the building up of Rummy requires considerable
skill in holding and discarding cards. We cannot, therefore, say that the game of Rummy is a
game of entire chance. It is mainly and preponderantly a game of skill."
In this case, the Supreme Court also upheld the levy of a nominal service charge for
provision of a physical space, cards, etc., to play a game of rummy. In the case of K.R.
Lakshmanan V. State of , AIR 1996 SC 1153, the Supreme Court held that the
betting
on horse races was a game of skill. It rationalised that in a horse race the winner is
not
determined by chance alone,as the condition, speed and endurance of the horse and the
skill
and management of the rider are factors affecting the result of the race. The better has
the
opportunity to exercise his judgment and discretion in determining the horse on which to
bet.
