JUDGMENT H.C.P. Tripathi, J. - This revision is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of Etawah, upholding the applicants conviction and sentence of two weeks rigorous imprisonment under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act as recorded by a Magistrate First Class 2. According to the prosecution, Sub-Inspector Pratap Bhan Singh received information that satta gambling was going on in a public place near the house of the applicant Tej Singh. He organised a raiding party of about 30 or 35 persons which also consisted of the two witnesses Sadiq Husain and Hari Singh. When the raiding party came near the house of Tej Singh, they saw that Tej Singh was sitting on the steps of his new house shouting stake Rs. 1/2/- and Rs. 100 and Ram Das was sitting near him. A man is alleged to have come there and staked nine annas and Ram Das noted the numbers on a slip and gave it to that man. Tej Singh received the money from that man and kept it in his jhola. Then the police party pounced on them and arrested Ram Das but strangely enough in spite of their large number and in spite of the fact that the place was very narrow, Tej Singh managed to escape. From the possession of Ram Das, a book Ex. II was recovered wherein were found two satta parchas and a pencil. Recovery memo was prepared and after the arrest of Tej Singh subsequently, both of them were sent up for trial under Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act. 3. At the trial the applicants pleaded not guilty to the charge and denied the entire prosecution story. Tej Singh stated that only a month or so before f the occurrence he and Ram Das given applications to the District Authorities complaining against the behaviour of the Kotwali police and that was why they had been sent up on a false charge. 4. The case of the prosecution was supported by Sub-Inspector Pratap Bhan, Sadiq Husain and Hari Singh. Relying on their statement, the learned Magistrate has recorded a conviction of the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. 4. The case of the prosecution was supported by Sub-Inspector Pratap Bhan, Sadiq Husain and Hari Singh. Relying on their statement, the learned Magistrate has recorded a conviction of the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. From the recovery memo on the record and from the statement of the witnesses it is obvious that no amount of money was recovered either from the possession of Ram Das or from the place where the alleged satta gambling was going on. It is really strange that if Tej Singh and Ram Das were indulging in satta gambling what happened to the stakes which they must have received from the bidders. It is still more strange that in spite of a large concourse of 35 persons Tej Singh managed to escape f from the scene and ran away. None of the witnesses produced are men of the locality. A certified copy of the application filed by Tej Singh in the court of A. D. M. Etawah complaining against the behaviour of the Kotwali police is on the record. In this application he has mentioned that a Sub-Inspector of Police had abused him and others, residents of the Mohalla, and had tried to take Ram Das with him to the Kotwali, on which the Mohalla people assembled and gave him a few Chappal blows. He had asked the A. D. M. to transfer that ; Sub-Inspector from Kotwali. In view of this background and in view of the non-recovery of any money from the possession of Ram Das, I am of opinion ; that the assessment of evidence made by the courts below is wholly unreasonable and the charge under Section 13 of the U.P. Public Gambling Act cannot be sustained against the applicants. 7. This revision is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the applicants are set aside. They are on bail. Their bail-bonds are discharged. They need not surrender.