BHIMRAO TRIMBAKRAO INGLE vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Supreme Court held that the appellants were wrongfully convicted under Section 5 of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887, as the prosecution failed to prove that the location constituted a 'common gaming house' under Section 3(ii) of the Act. The Court emphasized that a rebuttable presumption under Section 7 cannot override factual findings that discredit the prosecution's evidence. Consequently, the Court overturned the conviction, establishing that a location cannot be deemed a common gaming house if the essential elements of profit or charges are not proven.