JUDGMENT - BHOLE, J.:---The three accused, who were prosecuted for an offence punishable under section 12(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act (hereinafter called the Gambling Act) for accepting Matka bets at an open place viz. behind Khatiji Mansion, Bombay and convicted and sentenced for the same, have come here in appeal. The Sub-Inspector of Police of the Anti-Gambling Squad after verifying the information whether there was gambling going on at a public place behind Khatiji Mansion arranged for a bogus punter and a raid. The bogus punter was shown the place and was given one rupee marked note and was asked to lay a bet on figures 1 to 3 at that place. The necessary panchanamas were drawn of all this and the party went in a police van to Kemps corner and after parking the van there walked down this distance to August Kranti Marg. They sent the punter to the place where the three accused were sitting with two lanterns and necessary equipment for Matka bets. The punter went there with a one rupee marked note and laid a bet on figures 1 to 3 and returned and signalled. The Police then went and raided the place and arrested the accused. The first accused was found with a ball pen and Matka recording books with carbon papers with six slips. There was also a duplicate of slip 5 7 6 where Matka figures 1 to 3 were recorded by the accused. He was found also with the marked rupee note as well as Rs. 15.50p. The second accused was also found with a pen with a Matka recording book with some slips, some torn and some untorn. He was also found with Rs. 32/-. The third accused was also found there with a duplicate Matka slip books and a sum of Rs. 200/-. A panchanama of all this was drawn and after necessary verification all the three accused were prosecuted. 2. All the three accused denied having committed the offence and said that they had nothing to do with the offence; they were not found in possession of the books or the pens and they did not take bet of the bogus punter. The learned Magistrate was satisfied with the evidence led by the prosecution and found the accused guilty. 2. All the three accused denied having committed the offence and said that they had nothing to do with the offence; they were not found in possession of the books or the pens and they did not take bet of the bogus punter. The learned Magistrate was satisfied with the evidence led by the prosecution and found the accused guilty. He then convicted each of the accused under section 12(a) of the Gambling Act and sentenced each of them to suffer R.I.. for one month and also to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-. This order of conviction and sentence is challenged here. 3. The prosecution for the purpose of proving the charge have examined punter Mohammad Hasan Maniar (P.W. 1) as well as panch witness Mohammad Shaikh Ahmed (P.W. 2) and Sub-Inspector of Police Madhukar Patil (P.W. 3) Punter Mohammad Hasan appears to be a habitual punter who admitted that he had acted as a punter in more than 20 cases. Evidently therefore he is clearly a police agent and prima facie therefore his evidence cannot be relied unless and until it is corroborated in all material particulars. He was given before the panchas a marked one rupee note and was asked to lay a bet on 1 to 3 with the three accused at that public place. He says that he went there, gave the one rupee marked currency note and laid the bet on 1 to 3. After he returned he signalled and the Police then raided the place. It was tried to be shown that the panch witness has also appeared as a witness before by bringing the record of the criminal case in other case, but the address given by this witness appears to be quite different from the address given by the present pancha witness. Evidently therefore this panch witness appears to be a person who had not appeared before as a panch witness. He corroborates the evidence of the punter and says that when he went with the raiding party he found the accused Nos. 1 and 2 sitting on a-box and accused No. 3 standing and there were two lamps. Accused No. 1 was found with the marked currency note which was given to the punter and he had also some money and Matka book and a ball pen. Accused No. 2 was also found with Matka slips and Rs. 1 and 2 sitting on a-box and accused No. 3 standing and there were two lamps. Accused No. 1 was found with the marked currency note which was given to the punter and he had also some money and Matka book and a ball pen. Accused No. 2 was also found with Matka slips and Rs. 32/- as well as a ball pen and accused No. 3 with Rs. 200/- and some slips. He proves the panchanama which is one record and the panchanama corroborates him in all material details. P.S.I. Patil also corroborates all this. The point, therefore, that arises here for consideration is whether all this evidence proves the guilt of the accused or not. 4. M. Karmarkar the learned Advocate for the appellant invites my attention to (Emperor v. Harilal Gordhan)1, 39 Bom.L.R. 613. This case is usually cited for the purpose of showing that punters are police agents and therefore accomplices and their evidence therefore should be corroborated before it should be acted upon. The then Chief Justice Sir John Beaumont was also of the view that the case was not improved by providing a police agent with a companion and calling him a punch. He was also of the view that the Police Officer is not competent to go into the witness box and state that in his view based on experience in other case certain slips are instruments of gaming. The slips in that case were quite unintelligible and did not support to be records of gambling transactions, although the Police Officer stated that those slips were the instruments of gaming. The question as to whether a Police Officer is entitled to go into the box and speak as an expert was raised in that case. Sir John Beaumont, C.J. was of the view that the Sub Inspector of Police in that case did not give any evidence to establish his means of knowledge and to express opinion in accordance with some system or code ; because that was not done, therefore he was not satisfied with the evidence of the Sub- Inspector and it is in that view that he allowed the revision application before him. Mr. Karmarkar, therefore, says that our case is almost similar to the case before Sir John Beaumont C.J. and therefore I should allow this appeal. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Bhonsale, the learned Asstt. Government. Mr. Karmarkar, therefore, says that our case is almost similar to the case before Sir John Beaumont C.J. and therefore I should allow this appeal. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Bhonsale, the learned Asstt. Government. Pleader relies on (State of Maharashtra v. Talaksi Malsi Sawla)2, 75 Bom.L.R. 373. The is a judgment of Division Bench of this Court. Mr. Bhonsale says that this case lays down some principles by which gambling cases can be proved. According to him, in so far as our case is concerned, it is enough if the prosecution establishes that the Police Officer had reasonably suspected that the accused were gaming in a public place. That proof according to him is there. It is further contended by him that the slips and other articles, which were found, are also established to be the instruments of gaming. If that is so, then according to Mr. Bhonsale the prosecution have discharged their burden. Now it is the case of the prosecution that the punter was given a marked one rupee note and was asked to lay a bet on figures 1 to 3 open to close with the accused. After the punter returned and after he handed over the chit market "1 to 3" the place was raided and the book from which the chit was given to the punter was found in the Matka book with accused No. 1. In the Matka book---and that is exactly duplicate of No. 376, which was given to punter---figures 1 to 3 are also shown. Then P.S.I. Patil also found that accused No. 1 marked currency one rupee note, which was given to the punter for laying a bet. In addition to this finding accused No. 1 was also found with Matka recording book with carbon papers. There were also slips of the first duplicate. Moneys also were found with him. Similarly instruments of gaming were found with the second as well as the third accused. Now surely all this can be said to be the instruments of gaming. P.S.I. Patil also swears and says that before arranging for the raid he had verified that the accused were engaged in taking the bets from the members of public. It is only after verifying that he arranged the raid after sending a punter to lay a bet. Now surely all this can be said to be the instruments of gaming. P.S.I. Patil also swears and says that before arranging for the raid he had verified that the accused were engaged in taking the bets from the members of public. It is only after verifying that he arranged the raid after sending a punter to lay a bet. It appears to me that the prosecution have discharged their burden and this is not a case where some unintelligible chits were found, as was in the case before Sir John Beaumont C.J. 6. I therefore, confirm the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellant-accused by the lower Court and dismiss the appeal filed by them. Accused to surrender. ------