AMIR ALAM KHAN, J.--- This order shall dispose of ICAs Nos. 344, 380, 395, 402 and 693 of 2000, as they arise out of the various orders passed by the learned Single Judges of this Court on identical subject-matter, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed.
2. The appellants in the appeals afore-noted-are either Anjuman Prize Bond Dealers or individual deal with the prize bonds, who had proceeded to challenge the Government of Punjab Circular No. SO(CR&A) 1-9/99, dated 19.4.1999 issued by the Home Department thereby addressing all the Divisional Commissioners, all Range Deputy Inspectors General of Police, all Deputy Commissioners and all District Superintendents of Police in the Province of Punjab thereby intimating the aforesaid officers that it has come to the notice of the Government that in the garb of prize bond business gambling in the form of 'parchi' system is being carried on by various persons, which is an illegal activity. Consequently the said officers were called upon to take action against those indulging in the illegal activity of gambling .Through parchi ' system. Based whereupon a direction was also sought hat the respondents be directed to refrain from interfering and losing down the business of the appellants in any manner whatsoever as also in violation of Article 18 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
3. The challenge afore stated as also the mandamus as rayed for has been made and asked with the assertions that the appellants are running a lawful trade of the sale of prize bonds and size bond numbers which is not opposed to any law for the time being in force and that the appellants have vested right under article 18 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 973 to acquire and carry on any lawful trade and business, while he respondents, in furtherance of letter afore- referred have tarted to interfere in the lawful business of the appellants and ave also gone to the extent of forcibly closing down the same. It s also the case of the appellants that the business being undertaken by them cannot constitute gambling so as to bring it within the purview of the Prevention of Gambling Act, 1977. The njuman Prize Bond Dealers had also filed writ petitions in the representative capacity for it is claimed that as per the charter of e said Anjuman it is its duty to look after the welfare and interest of the prize bond dealers in the city or the province as the Section 23 of the Contract Act provides for reaching an agreement as also regulating the rights and obligations arising therefrom, it also vests the Court with the jurisdiction and discretion to regard any agreement as immoral or opposed to the public policy. It has already been held that the agreements entered into and concluded through parchi' system are wagering agreements, which tantamount to betting or gambling, but apart therefrom the said agreements, in our considered opinion, are not only immoral but also opposed to the public policy for it would be unjust and unfair to leave the people in the hands of unwary prize bond dealers, who have established their business without the backing of any law as also without any licence thereby regulating their affairs such as issuance of parchis' etc. The citizens cannot also be made prey of the dealers, who have devised system thereby entrapping innocent citizens in the false hopes of getting prizes. As far the argument that the prize bonds as issued by the State Bank of Pakistan as also the sale and purchase of the prize bonds are not prohibited, therefore, the parchi' system should also not be prohibited, suffice it to observe here that the sale and purchase of prize bonds are backed by guarantee of the State and so is the case about the prizes while in the case of dealers in the prize bonds no such guarantee exists with the result that they are free to go back on their promise. And the grievance of the parchi' holders cannot be redressed in a Court of law for no wagering contract can be enforced in a Court of law. -
8. For the reasons afore-stated, these appeals are found to be meritless, therefore, the same are dismissed.