State Of Bombay vs R. M. D.

Chamarbaugwala

Facts- advertisement of gambling practiced in bengaluru in a newspaper which is circulated not

only in Bengaluru but also in Bombay.

LEGAL PROVISIONS- The Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition

Control and Tax Act of 1948,
S.2(1)(d) - definition - prize competition means a prize competition within
the meaning of the Prize Competitions Act, 1955;
s. 2(1) (e) -'promoter in relation to a prize competition means the person
licensed to promote or conduct a prize competition under the Prize Competitions Act,
1955 and in relation to a lottery includes a proprietor, manager, Organizer or any
person having the control or directing the conduct of a lottery and in the case of a
lottery conducted through a newspaper includes the publisher of such newspaper.

Constitutional provisions –

Doctrine of territorial nexus- Article 245

Article 301 - Subject to the other provisions of this Part, trade, commerce and intercourse
throughout the territory of India shall be free.

It was held that while testing the validity of the Bombay lotteries act, it would be
necessary to decide whether it was with respect to the topic assigned to the legislature
There is sufficient territorial nexus to entitle the State Legislature to collect the tax
from the petitioners who carry on the prize competitions through the medium of a
newspaper printed and published outside the State of Bombay. The prize competitions
being of a gambling nature, they cannot be regarded as trade or commerce and as such
the petitioners cannot claim any fundamental right under Art. 19(1)(g) in respect of
such competitions, nor are they entitled to the protection of Art. 301.