Men charged with mahjong gambling
- Details
- Created on Wednesday, 04 February 2009 07:30
- Last Updated on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 18:00
- Written by Staff
JOHOR BARU (Malaysia) - Seven men who pleaded guilty to playing mahjong, made everyone smile when they told a magistrate that they were old and merely playing to pass time.
Lim Hock Seng, 66, Low Chaw Whay, 48, Teong Liong Tee 59, Goh Lay Keng, 64, Tay Moi Tee and Ma Mong Tiong, both 54, and Singaporean Lim Ah Yeow, 52, were charged with gambling illegally by playing mahjong with cash bets.
Their offence is classified under Section 6(1) of the Open Gambling House Act 1953 as carrying out illegal gambling activities, which carries the sentence of not more than RM5,000 fine or not more than six month imprisonment or both.
Magistrate Nor Shahid Abd Malik sentenced them to RM1,000 fine each (approx. 150 USD).
They could also face one-month in prison should they fail to settle the fine.

which defines gaming as:
=== QUOTE ===
"gaming" with its grammatical variations and ognate expressions means the playing of any game of chance or of mixed chance and skill for money or money's worth and includes the playing of any game specified in Column I of the First and Second Schedules and the playing or operation of any gaming machine;
=== END ===
Mahjong isn't specifically mentioned in "Column I of the First and Second Schedules" but "Jin Rummy" is which is pretty close. However, I imagine that the exact game played isn't the point, it's that it's any game of chance played in a public place that is bet upon for money (or similar).
There's an interesting thread about it here.
Search that page for "03-02-2006 01:01 PM" to find a really useful post.
Hope that's of help.
Gareth




I'm in Toscane too !! Close Siena.
I wondered to improve my gaming during my holidays but I can't found player...
This news is funny indeed :)
That is also why, in these trivial news stories, I usually give the link to the original article, so my readers will have a general idea about how trustful the source is.
See also the discussion here.
How can you claim to be an independant journalist when you relay second-hand, unverifiable stories, that, from what all we can know, might very well be embellished or pure fictions?