Section 12: Instruments of gaming, etc., found in public street or place may be ordered to be destroyed or forfeited on conviction.

On conviction of any person under section 9, the convicting magistrate may order that-

(i) all the instruments of gaming seized, shall forthwith be destroyed or forfeited;

(ii) all birds or animals seized, shall be sold and the proceeds thereof with all the moneys seized shall be forfeited.

Explained:

Section 12 of the Telangana Gaming Act, 1974 deals with the destruction or forfeiture of instruments of gaming, money, birds and animals seized in connection with gaming in a public street or public place. The provision operates after a person has been convicted under Section 9 of the Act.

Section 9 deals with gaming, or setting birds or animals to fight, in a public street, thoroughfare or any place to which the public has access. Once conviction is recorded under Section 9, Section 12 empowers the convicting Magistrate to pass appropriate orders concerning the seized articles.

Under Section 12(i), all instruments of gaming seized by the police may be ordered to be destroyed or forfeited. Instruments of gaming can include cards, dice, gaming tables, documents or other articles used or intended to be used for gaming. The definition also covers certain money or winnings connected with gaming.

Under Section 12(ii), birds or animals seized in connection with the offence may be sold. The proceeds from such sale, together with the money seized, may be forfeited.

Important Judgments

In Shaik Zaheer v. State of A.P., the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that conviction under Section 9 is a condition precedent for forfeiture or destruction under Section 12. The Magistrate had acquitted the accused but nevertheless confiscated ₹3,000 seized from him. The High Court set aside the confiscation order and directed refund of the money.

Similarly, in N. Mohan Reddy & Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court reiterated that forfeiture under Section 12 cannot be ordered when the accused has been acquitted; conviction under Section 9 is essential before the power of forfeiture can be exercised.

In A. Bhaskar & Others v. State of A.P., the High Court again applied the principle that confiscation under Section 12 depends upon conviction under Section 9 and quashed the confiscation orders where the accused had been acquitted.

Thus, Section 12 does not independently authorise automatic confiscation. Its operation is specifically linked to a conviction under Section 9, providing an important procedural safeguard for persons whose property has been seized during gaming-related investigations.