Judgment: - Appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the acquittal of the accused for an offence under section 4 (1) (a) (vi) of the Madras Gaming Act, 1930. The accused conducted a Tamil drama and he gave prizes to some of the purchasers of tickets, on the basis of some arithmetical calculations. The accused did so, in order to get large crowd for his drama. The learned Sub-Magistrate, Chidambaram, held that the act of the accused would not amount to wagering or betting. In order to sustain a conviction, the prosecution should prove that the accused used the premises for the purpose of gaming on any transaction or scheme of wagering or betting in which the receipt or distribution of winnings or prizes in money or otherwise is made to depend on chance. It could hardly be said that there was any transaction or scheme of wagering or betting in this case. The members of the public purchased tickets to attend the drama and got the benefit of witnessing the drama. It is possible that the accused, in this case, wanted to attract a large crowd for his drama by announcing that he would distribute prizes to some of the holders of tickets, to be determined on the basis of arithmetical calculations. If there was no drama, the act of the accused would amount to betting or scheme of wagering. The members of the public cannot be said to have lost anything as they were able to attend the drama for which they obtained tickets. The acquittal of the accused, in this case, is correct and there is no justification to interfere with the acquittal. The appeal is summarily rejected under section 421 of the Criminal Procedure Code. K.S. ------------- Appeal summarily rejected.