Allowed

M/S. Highway - 66 v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Oct 2023WP/12378/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by a cafe proprietor seeking non-interference by police regarding hookah services. The court directed police not to interfere provided hookah smoking is restricted to tobacco products in a designated, licensed area and insurance harassment occurs through vigilant but non-harassing inspections.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to earmark a separate licensed area for hookah smoking; police instructed not to harass petitioner but to inspect periodically with notice; petition disposed of.

M/S. Highway - 66 Vs the State of Karnataka — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:36285 WP No. 12378 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 12378 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

M/S. HIGHWAY - 66, REPRESENTED ITS PROPRIETOR MR. SHAKTHI PRASAD R UCHIL, S/O MR. RAMACHANDRA K UCHIL, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/A 11-16B(1), PANACHAKSHARI SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR, SOMESHWAR, MANGALORE - 575 002.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. SUDHINDRA BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,

¶11

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 072.

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MANGALORE, NEAR POLICE TRAINING SCHOOL, PANDESHWAR, MANGALURU, KARNATAKA - 575 001.

¶14

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER/INSPECTOR, ULLAL POLICE STATION, RR9R+RJ3, ULLAL MANGALURU, KARNATAKA - 575 020.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:36285 WP No. 12378 of 2023

¶17

THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ULLAL, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, RRCR+F9P, ULLAL DARGA RD., ULLAL, KARNATAKA - 575 020.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH K, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOT TO INTERFERE IN THE SALE AND SERVICE OF HERBAL FLAVORED HOOKAH IN THE DESIGNATED SMOKING AREA OF ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PETITIONER AND ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶24

Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice for all the respondents.

¶25

The petitioner is a proprietary concern doing business of a cafe and providing space for smoking hookah. The petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-police authorities not to interfere with the business of the petitioner including the service of hookah to

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36285 WP No. 12378 of 2023

¶27

its customers in the smoking area, within the shop premises. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that along with the memorandum of the writ petition, three judgments of this Court have been furnished, wherein directions have been given to the respondent police authorities not to interfere in the course of the business, since it is not a prohibited activity.

¶28

Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that in a subsequent decision in the case of PNB Ventures Vs. The State of Karnataka and Others in W.P.No.23275/2022 dated 30.05.2018, two additional conditions were imposed on what was earlier directed in the earlier matter. The High Court Government Pleader would therefore submit that the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the directions issued in the case of PNB ventures (Supra).

¶29

In that view, a similar benefit is required to be extended to the petitioner also. Hence, it is directed that the respondent shall not insist upon the petitioner to obtain

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:36285 WP No. 12378 of 2023

¶31

licence for the use of Hookah in the smoking zone provided by the petitioner if such facilities is provided only for the purpose of smoking Tobacco through Hookah in accordance with law. However, if any credible information is received by the respondents or in the process of monitoring if any illegal activities are found including the use of banned substance, certainly the respondents or such other Law Enforcing Authorities would be entitled to take action in accordance with law.

¶32

The writ petition stands disposed of in the

¶33

following terms:

¶34

(a) Petitioner shall earmark exclusively a separate area/place(s) with appropriate enclosure in the hotel premise and necessarily after obtaining licence for the purpose of hookah smoking and no other area or portion of premise shall be used by the customers of the petitioner for smoking hookah.

¶35

(b) Under the guise of inspection, the respondent-jurisdictional police shall not

¶36

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:36285 WP No. 12378 of 2023

¶37

harass the petitioner. However, it does not deter them from inspecting the premise at periodical intervals with notice to the petitioner, if necessary.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

CT: BHK

M/S. Highway - 66 v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Highway - 66 v. the 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Amanath Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Mohammed Sharfuddin

Sri S Narasimha Bharathi Vs State of Karnataka Department of

Pushkraj Crushing Equipments Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Senior Divisional Engineer

Sri.K.R.Gangadarappa Vs State of Karnataka

Secon Private Limited Vs Executive Engineer

M/S Pup Cafe Vs State of Karnataka