ORDER : 1. The present petitioners, who are arraigned as accused Nos. 1 to 3 in respondent No. 1-Police Station in Crime No. 100/2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 78(1)(a)(vi) and 80 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘KP Act’) have sought for quashing of the said criminal proceedings against them. 2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that, based on a credible information that accused/petitioners herein were involved in cricket betting and gambling, the respondent No. 2, joined by the panchas and duly supported by the permission of his superior authorities and the permission granted by the Court for search and seizure, has proceeded on 10.11.2021, at 9.45 p.m. to a house near Danammadevi temple of Kunchanur road in Jamakhandi town. Parking their official jeep at a distance, the raiding team observed that, three persons sitting in a house said to be of Sri. Kallappa Singadi, were viewing their cell phones (mobile phones) and one among them, was collecting money from the public and noting down something in the note book. Suspecting the cricket betting, the raiding team surrounded them, however, the people who were paying money to the alleged bookies, ran away from the place. The present petitioners who were collecting money from the public and noting down in a note book and also making use of cell phone were caught hold. From their possession, not less than eight cell phones, a note book, a ball point pen, two motorcycles and a cash amount of Rs. 1,55,500/- collected from the people on betting were seized by drawing a seizure panchanama in the spot. The raiding Police Officer after returning to the police station, lodged a complaint which was registered in respondent No. 1 Police Station in their station Crime No. 100/2021 against the present petitioners for the above mentioned offences. 3. Learned High Court Government Pleader is appearing for the respondents. 4. Though this matter was listed for admission, however, with the consent from both side, the matter is taken up for its final disposal on merit. 5. Heard argument from both side. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners in his argument submitted that even according to the complaint, the accused were making use of a WEB site with the name ICEEXCH-IO and they were only viewing the mobile phone. 5. Heard argument from both side. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners in his argument submitted that even according to the complaint, the accused were making use of a WEB site with the name ICEEXCH-IO and they were only viewing the mobile phone. No money in cash was recovered from the petitioners. There is nothing to suggest that they were involved in the act of gaming or gambling, as such, the alleged offences are not made out. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that by virtue of the amended definition of ‘gaming’ and amendment to Section 78(1)(a)(vi) of the KP Act, the act of the accused squarely falls within the ambit of the online gaming and betting. As such, a prima facie case is made out against the accused and a trial is required to be followed after due investigation. 8. The alleged crime is registered for the offence under Section 78(1)(a)(vi) and Section 80 of KP Act. The amended Section 78(1)(a)(vi) of the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021, reads as below: “78. Opening, etc. of certain forms of gaming: (1) Whoever: (a) being the owner or occupier or having the use of any building, room, tent, enclosure, vehicle, vessel or place, or at cyber cafe or online gaming involving wagering or betting including computer resource or mobile application or internet or any communication device as defined in the Information Technology Act, 2000 (Central Act 21 of 2000) opens, keeps or uses the same for the purpose of gaming: (i) xxx xxx xxx (ii) xxx xxx xxx (iii) xxx xxx xxx (iv) xxx xxx xxx (v) xxx xxx xxx (vi) 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 or skill of other.” 9. A reading of the amended Section 78(1)(a)(vi) of KP (Amendment) Act, 2021, makes it clear that, online gaming involving wagering or betting including computer resource or mobile application or internet or any communication device is also included. Further, betting in which the receipt or distribution of winning or prizes in money or otherwise, which is made to depend on chance, now also includes skill of other. Added to it, by virtue of the Amendment of KP Act, 2021, after Section 78(1)(a)(vi), clause (vii) is also inserted which reads as below: “78. Opening, etc. Further, betting in which the receipt or distribution of winning or prizes in money or otherwise, which is made to depend on chance, now also includes skill of other. Added to it, by virtue of the Amendment of KP Act, 2021, after Section 78(1)(a)(vi), clause (vii) is also inserted which reads as below: “78. Opening, etc. of certain forms of gaming: (vii) on any act of risking money or otherwise on the unknown result of an event including on a game of skill.” 10. Similarly, the first part of clause (7) of Section 2 which defines ‘gaming’ also has underwent an amendment under the same KP (Amendment) Act 2021, which now reads as below: “2(7) “Gaming” means and includes online games, involving all forms of wagering or betting, including in the form of tokens valued in terms of money paid before or after issue of it, or electronic means and virtual currency, electronic transfer of funds in connection with any game of chance, but does not include a lottery or wagering or betting on horse-race run on any race course within or outside the State, when such wagering or betting takes place.” 11. Amended Section 2(7) with Section 78(1)(a) of KP Act now makes it very clear that, wagering or betting by collecting money from the public upon an uncertain result of a game or an event including a game of skill, would fall under Section 78(1)(a) of KP act. Therefore, the alleged cricket betting would get no exception from Section 78(1)(a) read with Section 2(7) of KP Act. 12. In the instant case, as per the complaint, not less than 7 cell phones were recovered which were alleged to have been used by the accused for the purpose of cricket betting. According to the complaint, the present petitioners, as accused, were collecting money from the public on the assurance of giving double the amount if they succeed in the betting. For the said purpose, those cell phones were said to have been being used and they were getting an access to a particular WEB site for the said purpose. According to the complainant, a note book recording the receipt of money from the public, a ball point pen and two motorcycles were also seized. In addition to this, some amount in cash, from each of the accused, which in total amounted to a sum of Rs. According to the complainant, a note book recording the receipt of money from the public, a ball point pen and two motorcycles were also seized. In addition to this, some amount in cash, from each of the accused, which in total amounted to a sum of Rs. 1,55,500/- was also said to have been recovered from the spot under the same panchanama. 13. In the said circumstance, since the matter is required to be further investigated, it cannot be said that, prima facie, no case is made out though contended by the petitioners. As such, the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, the allegations made in the complaint, though, taken as true, still, would not make out a prima facie case against the petitioners, is not acceptable. 14. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed as devoid of merit. 15. In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A. No. 1/2021 does not survive for consideration.