ORDER This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in STC No.8625 of 2005 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. 2. The petitioner is the 5th accused among five accused for offence punishable under Section 8 of Tamil Nadu Gaming Act. It is the case of the prosecution that on 26.10.2005, the petitioner and other accused were playing cards at Peraringar Anna Manamahil Mandram, Rajapandiyan compund, Tenkasi and the respondent-police on information visited the club and arrested the accused on the allegation that they have committed the offence of gambling which is prohibited under law. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been elected as President of Peraringar Anna Manamahil Mandram registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration Act, 1975 and all others are members of the abovesaid Mandram. The abovesaid Anna Manamahil Mandram is functioning at Rajapandiyan compound, Tenkasi from 2003 onwards. The abovesaid Mandram is governed by the bye-laws. The aim of the Mandram is the development of the social recreational movements amongst the members. The members of the Mandram play indoor games etc., and the members have facilities for reading. To become a member the eligible person should apply before the competent authority of the abovesaid Mandram. After thorough verification of those applications and an interview a person will be allowed to join as a member. The admission into the Mandram is strictly reserved for its members only and most of the members are respectable citizens of out nation like Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, Government Officials, Teachers, Businessmen etc., It is further submitted that a writ petition has been filed in WP No.21081of 2004 before the High Court, Madras against the respondent-police to restrain him from unlawfully interfering with the activities of the members of the club and it has been ordered accordingly. Even thereafter, the respondent-police is continuously interfering with the activities of the club. It is further submitted that the members of the club were playing cards for recreation and they have not indulged in any gambling. It is also submitted that the respondent-police, without observing any procedure established by law, erroneously registered a case against the petitioner and the other members of the club. 4. It is further submitted that the members of the club were playing cards for recreation and they have not indulged in any gambling. It is also submitted that the respondent-police, without observing any procedure established by law, erroneously registered a case against the petitioner and the other members of the club. 4. The learned Government Advocate submits that at the time, when the respondent-police visited the club, the petitioner and others were playing “Vettu Cheettu” and Rs.243/- has been recovered from the table. Under such circumstance, the offence punishable under Sections 8 and 9 of the Gaming Act is attracted. Further it is submitted that there are prima-facie materials to proceed against the petitioner and others. 5. I have perused the materials available on record and heard the submissions made. Admittedly, the respondent-police, on information received, has visited the club at 2.00 p.m on 26.10.2005. It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court and by this Court that when a Police Officer visits a club of similar nature, he must appreciate the information received and must approach the nearest learned Magistrate to obtain a search warrant in this regard. In the instant case, though the respondent has visited the club during day time and when there is every possibility of getting such warrant, it has not been obtained. Admittedly, the petitioner and others are members of a club. In a case reported in Raman Nair and others v. State 1990(2) MWN(Cr)HC 195, it has been held as follows: "7.. .......To decide a question whether a club, where gaming in cards is carried on, is a gaming house or not, the relevant consideration is not whether any member of the club makes a profit but whether the club, as a person, occupying or using or keeping the house or room makes a profit. The fact that the police recovered huge sum of money on the table on the date in question is not sufficient to throw any light as to the club or the Secretary of the club deriving anything from out of the money available on the table at the relevant time. The fact that the members playing cards make a profit is not at all a criterion to decide the question of the premises being used as a gaming house. The fact that the members playing cards make a profit is not at all a criterion to decide the question of the premises being used as a gaming house. The huge amount, available on the table at the relevant time, may be going to the pockets of the members playing the game of cards. As already indicated, that is not sufficient to consider the premises of the club a gaming house under Section 3 of the Act. Once the premises is not proved to be a gaming house, it goes without saying that the petitioners cannot be stated to have committed the offences under Sections 8 and 9 of the Act." It has been repeatedly held that running of a common gaming house is a primordial requisite before a person could be convicted for offence under Sections 8 and 9 of the Act and gaming is not an offence per-se. Even assuming that the allegations putforth by the prosecution is true, it cannot constitute an offence as alleged. Even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, it would be a futile exercise and there is no scope for conviction. 6. In view of the foregoing reason, I find that this is a fit case to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the proceedings in STC No.8625 of 2005 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi is quashed and this criminal original petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Crl.M.P. is closed.