Allowed

Sri. Vinayaka Recreation Association v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Oct 2021WP/11981/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coordinate Bench W.P.No.3286/2020 followed. Petitioner sought non-interference in lawful activities. Court held matter substantially similar to earlier W.P. Disposed granting relief quashing notice with liberty to police to act on COVID-19 or other condition violations.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice quashed granting relief to petitioner. Liberty to police to take action if conditions including COVID-19 regulations are violated.

Sri. Vinayaka Recreation Association… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.11981 OF 2021(GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. VINAYAKA RECREATION ASSOCIATION, BANNIKUPPE VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, HUBBUR POST, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 120

¶9

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI.MANU N.P., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.

¶15

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TUMAKURU SUB-DIVISION, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.

¶16

CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR, KATHSANDRA CIRCLE, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.

¶17

SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HEBBUR POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.

¶18

… RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, AGA)

¶20

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INSIST UPON THE PETITIONER TO OBTAIN THE LICESE TO CARRY ON LAWFUL ACTIVITIES IN THE PREMISES OF THE PETITIONERS ASSOCIATION EITHER UNDER THE POLICE ACT OR UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF LICENSING AND CONTROLLING OF PLACES OF PUBLIC AMUSEMENT ORDER AND NOT TO INTERFERE IN PROVIDING LIBRARY, LITERARY ACTIVITIES AND PROVIDES TO ITS MEMBERS IN DOOR AND OUT DOOR GAMES LIKE CARROM, CHESS, TABLE TENNIS, VOLLEY BALL, BADMINTON, RUMMY ETC., AND ALSO PROVIDES CULTURAL ACTIVITY SKILLS LIKE SINGING SONGS, DRAMA, PAINTING AND ETC WHICH ARE ORIENTED GAMES AND CULTURE SKILL AS HELD BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN VARIOUS WRIT PETITIONS AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The subject matter of this writ petition is substantially similar to the one in W.P.No.3286/2020 (GM-POLICE) between SNEHA BALAGA RECREATION CLUB (R) Vs. THE SUPERRINTENDENT OF POLICE & OTHERS, disposed off by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 20.02.2020.

¶25

Learned AGA is more than justified in submitting that in addition to conditions stipulated in the cognate judgment, the petitioner has to abide by the COVID – 19 related regulations/restrictions; and the petitioner agrees to the same.

¶26

¶27

The Division Bench of this Court in

¶28

W.A.Nos.932-933/1974 between A.V.VINODA & ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY disposed off on 11.12.1974, has held that the Court should treat the likecases alike and if relief is granted to a litigant, it has to be extended to similarly circumstanced litigants as well, there being no derogatory circumstances.

¶29

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed off granting relief to the petitioner in terms of the cognate judgment mentioned above; impugned notice is quashed with liberty to the police to take action in the event any of the conditions, including the COVID-19 related ones are violated.

¶30

All contentions are kept open.

¶31

No costs.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

Bsv

Sri. Vinayaka Recreation Association v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Vinayaka Recreation Association v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jone Lawrence Lewis Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Nitin Shambhukumar Kasliwal Vs Idbi Bank Limited

Jeetendra Kumar Rajan S/O S R Mahato, Vs the High Court of Karnataka

Sri K E Hiyiyanna Vs the Chief Engineer

Sri. C.Muniraju Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Harsha Associates Vs the Principal Secretary to the