Order The petitioner, P. Krishnamurthi, has been convicted under section 37(4) of the City Police Act, and has been fined Rs. 35 by the Third Presidency Magistrate, Madras, for receiving bets on horses running at the Guindy races at about 3-30 p.m. on 4th December, 1948. Mr. Ghatala, for the petitioner, raised three main contentions. The first was that P.W.2 who swore to his giving the petitioner Rs. 1-4-0 three times that day for betting, cannot be believed as P.W.2 did not know the petitioner before and could not have paid him the three bet amounts, especially as there were the regular race course men ready to receive bets. I cannot agree. The regular race course men don’t receive petty amounts like Rs. 1-4-0 from betting enthusiasts of poor means like P.W.2. They cater to gentlemen, who can afford to pay the regulation bet amounts. Bucket shop men secretly cater to men of petty means like P.W.2. Nor is previous friendship essential for giving and taking bets. In the exotic atmosphere of toddy-shops and race courses a camaraderie springs up like magic, and no previous friendship is necessary. The next contention was that the lower Court should have believed D.Ws.1 and 2 and held that the petitioner had gone there to bet himself, on behalf of himself and his friends, and not to receive bets, I cannot agree. D.Ws.1 and 2 were interested and unreliable. P.Ws.1 and 2 swore that the petitioner was only receiving bets from men of small means like P.W.2. The last contention was that receiving bets inside a race course by any one would be no offence, and that what the regular race course authorities could do with impunity others also could do. The argument is preposterous. Only those authorised to bet are exempt. Thus a man sentenced to death must be hanged by the usual jail authorities authorised to do so. For any man to go and catch him and hang him will be an offence; so too, for a layman to go and whip a man senteced to whipping or to lock up a man sentenced to imprisonment. The petitioner’s conviction was correct and is confirmed. The sentence too is not at all excessive. It too is confirmed, and this petition dismissed. V.S. ----- Petition dismissed.