Ganpat A/c Borgine et Al v Ramsingh

• Jurisdiction: Trinidad & Tobago
• Court: Court of Appeal (Trinidad and Tobago)
• Judge: Kelsick, J.A.
• Judgment Date: 27 July 1982
• Neutral Citation: TT 1982 CA 24
• Docket Number: Mag. App. No. 66 of 1982
• Date: 27 July 1982

Court of Appeal

Kelsick and Bernard, JJ.A.

Mag. App. No. 66 of 1982

Ganpat A/c Borgine et al

and

Ramsingh

R. Maharaj for the appellants.

Miss O. Seepaul for the respondent.

Criminal Law - Appeal against conviction — Gambling

Kelsick, J.A.

1 In this case the first appellants Baboolal Ganpat, was charged with allowing his premises to be used for cockfighting (there is no such offence contrary to s. 3 of the Gambling and Betting Act No. 22 of 1963 which I shall call “the Act”. The offence is permitting his premises to be used as a common gaming house.

2 A “common gaming house” is defined as including any premises kept or used for gambling. “Gamble” means “to play at or to engage in any game of chance for winnings in money or money's worth”; and “game of chance” includes “a game of chance and skill combined and a pretended game of chance or of chance and skill combined, but does not include any athletic game or sport.” (s. 2(1) of the Act).

3 The first appellant and the other appellants were also charged with gambling in a common gaming house contrary to s. 4(1) of the Act. It is quite obvious that cockfighting was taking place at the premises of the first appellant and the other appellants were there assisting as aiders and abettors. The appellants have been allowed to amend their notices of appeal to include a ground that the magistrate's decision was...