BHANDARI, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal on behalf of the State against the order of the City Magistrate, First Class, Ajmer dated the 9th of August, 1958, by which he acquitted the respondents under sec. 3/4 of the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance (No. 48 of 1949), 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance), on the ground that the provisions of these sections have not been extended by the Rajasthan Government to the Ajmer City, and, as such, no offence can be held to have been committed by the respondents. For a proper appreciation of the point involved in this appeal it is necessary to refer to the law relating to gambling in Rajasthan. His Highness the Rajpramukh of Rajasthan promulgated the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 (No. 48 of 1949 ). Sec. 1 (2) of the Ordinance ran, as follows: - " (2) Secs. 13 and 17 of this Ordinance extend to the whole of Rajasthan, and it shall be compatent to the Government, whenever it may think fit, to extend, by notification in the Rajasthan Gazette, all or any of the remaining secs. of this Ordinance to any city, town, suburb, railway station, house or local, area within Rajasthan and in such notification to define, for the purposes of this Ordinance, the limits of such city, town, suburb, station, house or local area and from time to time to alter the limits so defined. From the date of any such extension, so much of any law or rule having the force of law, which shall be in operation in the city, town, suburb, station house or local area to which such extension shall have been made, as shall be inconsistent with or repugnant to any sec. so extended, shall cease to have effect therein. " It may be mentioned that the former State of Ajmer was not part of the State of Rajasthan at the time when the Ordinance was promulgated. In that area, Ajmer Public Gambling Act, 1953 was in force. THIS Act is on the same lines as the Rajasthan Ordinance referred to above but all the sections of the Act extended to the whole of the Ajmer State.
(2.) ON the 1st of November, 1956, a new State of Rajasthan was formed which included the territory of the former State of Ajmer. Thereafter the Rajasthan Laws Extension Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the Extension Act) was enacted providing for the extension of certain Rajasthan laws in force in the pre-Reorganisation State of Rajasthan to Abu, Ajmer and Sunel areas of the new State. This Act came into force on the 1st of September, 1957. The Extension Act brought into force the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949, subject to certain amendments which are not material. Sec. 7 of the Extension Act is important and it runs, as follows: - "repeal and savings - Any law corresponding to the Rajasthan laws specified in the Schedule in force in the Abu area of the Ajmer area or the Sunel area immediately before the coming into force of this Act shall stand repealed: Provided that anything done or any action taken under any such law shall be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provision of the relevant Rajasthan law specified in Schedule and shall continue to be in force accordingly. " Sec. 7 repeals the Ajmer Public Gambling Act from the 1st of September, 1957. The date of the offence in this case is 18th of July 1958. Till then no notification was issued under the Ordinance by the State Government extending secs. 3 and 4 to the Ajmer City and only secs. 13 and 17 of the Ordinance remained operative under sec. 1 (2) of the Ordinance. Such notification, however, was issued later on on the 9th of September, 1958, and was published in the Rajasthan Rajpatra (Part 4 (c)), dated September 25, 1958. The contention raised on behalf of the respondents in the trial court was that sec. 7 of the Extension Act repealed the Ajmer Public Gambling Act, 1953, on the 1st of September 1957 when the Extension Act came into force and as the Rajasthan State had not extended secs. 3 and 4 of the Ordinance to Ajmer City at the time of the commission of the offence, the respondents cannot be convicted under these sections. This contention prevailed with the trial court. In this appeal it has been urged on behalf of the State that secs. 4 and 5 of the Ajmer Public Gambling Act, 1953 ran on the same lines as secs. 3 and 4 of the Ordinance and these sections should be deemed to have remained in force in spite of sec. 7 of the Extension Act till the date Secs. 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance were made applicable to the Ajmer City by the State of Rajasthan. Learned counsel for the respondents has supported the judgment of the trial court. After giving a careful consideration to the matter, we are of opinion that the argument urged on behalf of the State has got no force. Sec. 7 of the Extension Act repeals all laws corresponding to the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance from the date the Extension Act came into force. It cannot be said that the law in force of the former State of Ajmer on the subject of public gambling was not corresponding to the Rajasthan law contained in the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance. Learned Assistant Government Advocate argued that only Secs. 13 and 17 of that Ordinance came into force with the coming into force of the Extension Act and other sections were to be brought in force, by the act of the State and since this was not done till the date of the commission of the offence, it may be taken that till that date the other sections were brought in force the Ajmer Public Gambling Act retrained un-repealed to the extent covered by these sections. This argument ignores that under Sec. 7 of the Extension Act any law corresponding to the Rajasthan laws in force in the Ajmer area were repealed in toto. The Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance embodied the law on the subject of Gambling and if there was any law in force on that subject in the former State of Ajmer, that must be deemed to have been repealed by Sec. 7 of the Extension Act. There is no room for holding that part of the law was repealed and part remained in force. On all matters covered by the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance the Ajmer law must be deemed to have been repealed in spite of the fact that some of the sections of that Ordinance were not brought in force in some parts of the former Ajmer State and remained dormant. It would have been a different thing had there been a separate notification by the former State of Ajmer extending Secs. 3 and 4 of the Ajmer Public Gambling Act to the Ajmer City. Such notification could have been saved under sec. 7 (2) of the Extension Act. However, in the present case no separate notification was necessary as the Ajmer Public Gambling Act was in force throughout the entire former Ajmer State. The view taken by the learned magistrate is correct. The appeal has got no force and is dismissed. .;