The Supreme Court of India has clarified that playing cards does not always amount to an act of moral turpitude, as it restored the election of a man disqualified due to a conviction for "gambling in public." The case was heard by a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, who emphasized that not every instance of card playing should be viewed as immoral conduct.

Read Also:- Following Madhya Pradesh High Court Order, FIR Registered Against Minister Vijay Shah for Remarks on

Background of the Case

The case revolved around an appellant who had contested and won an election to the Board of Directors of a Cooperative Society in Karnataka. However, his victory was challenged by a losing candidate, citing that the appellant was convicted under Section 87 of the Karnataka Police Act for gambling, which allegedly involved moral turpitude.

Following this, the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies nullified the appellant's election, a decision that was upheld by the High Court. Unsatisfied, the appellant approached the Supreme Court, seeking a fair reassessment.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Clarifies Criteria for Senior Advocate Designation: Emphasizes Ability Over Long

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the case, overturned the decisions of the lower authorities. It noted that the allegations involved a situation where some individuals were found playing cards on the roadside, leading to a fine of Rs. 200 against the appellant without any formal trial.

"It seems from the allegations that some persons, while sitting on roadside, were playing cards. They were apprehended on the spot and a fine of Rs.200 was levied on the appellant, without any trial."

The Court emphasized that moral turpitude generally refers to conduct that is inherently vile, depraved, or connected to unethical behavior. It further added that mere card playing, especially as a form of entertainment, cannot automatically be categorized under this definition.

"Every action against which one can raise an eyebrow may not necessarily involve moral turpitude. There are so many forums for playing cards... It is difficult to accept that every form of such playing would involve moral turpitude."

Read Also:- Section 10 Transfer of Property Act Does Not Affect Government Land Allotment Conditions: Supreme Court

• The appellant was not a habitual gambler.
• The punishment of canceling his election was disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.
• Playing cards, in itself, is a common social activity for many, not always linked to immorality.

Considering these factors, the Supreme Court set aside the disqualification and restored the appellant’s election to the Board of Directors of the Society.

During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant acknowledged that playing cards is a popular mode of entertainment in India, especially among the common man. He highlighted that different societies have varying views on such activities:

"When we talk of diversity, inclusivity... playing cards is a source of entertainment for common man. One of the cheapest and harmless ways... moral turpitude is a different thing."

The Court’s decision establishes a clear distinction between casual social gaming and activities that can be legally or morally condemned.

Case Title: HANUMANTHARAYAPPA Y.C. Versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 3969/2023