Cold Pyramid Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

COLD PYRAMID PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. BYADRAHALLI LOKESH SAMPATH KUMAR HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT: 62M (OLD NO.251), 5^TH FLOOR 43^RD CROSS ROAD, 5^TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041

¶10

…COMPLAINANT

¶11

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M. MULLA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001 REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

¶15

... PROFORMA RESPONDENT

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶18

B. DAYANANDA

¶19

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001

¶20

VIKAS KUMAR VIKAS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (LAW AND ORDER), INFANTRY ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001

¶21

ABDUL AHAD

¶22

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE THE CITY CRIME BRANCH ROYAN CIRCLE, N.T. PET, BANGALORE

¶23

SARAH FATHIMA THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SOUTH DIVISION, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560 004

¶24

6. NARAYANA SWAMY

¶25

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SOUTH DIVISION, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 004

¶26

BASAVARAJ PATIL THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE JAYANAGAR POLICE STATION JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011

¶27

…ACCUSED

¶28

(BY SRI. S.H.RAGHAVENDRA, AGA)

¶29

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶31

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO FIND THE ACCUSED GUILTY OF CONTEMPT OF THE COURT FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDERS DATED 25.06.2024 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.16063/2024 (ANNEXURE-A) AND PUNISH THEM WITH IMPRISONMENT AS PER THE CONTEMPT OF THE COURTS ACT AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶32

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶34

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶35

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

¶36

Heard learned advocate Mr. Mohammed Shakeeb M. Mulla

¶37

for the complainant-petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. S.H. Raghavendra, who appeared upon service of copy of the petition in advance.

¶38

4 -

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶40

While disposing of Writ Petition No.16063 of 2024 as per judgment and order dated 25.06.2024, learned Single Judge issued the following directions,

¶41

"(i) The petitioner shall install CCTV cameras at the places of access to its members and also at all the places, where in game(s) is / are played by the members within a period of six weeks. The CCTV footage of at least prior 15 days period shall be made available by the petitioner to the jurisdictional police, as and when called upon to do so.

¶42

(ii) The petitioner shall issue identity card(s) to all its member(s), which shall be produced by the member(s), when called upon by the concerned police, during the raid(s), surveillance, etc.

¶43

(iii) The petitioner shall not allow any nonmember(s) or the guest(s) of the member(s) to make use of its premises for the purpose of playing any kind of game(s) or recreational activities.

¶44

(iv) The petitioner shall not permit any activity by any of its member(s), by indulging in acts of amusement, falling within the definition of Sections 2(14) and 2(15) of the Act and shall not permit any game(s) of chance as per Explanation (II) of Sub-Section(7) of Section 2 of Karnataka Police Act, 1863. The member(s) shall not be allowed to play any kind of game(s) with stakes or make any profit or gain out of the game(s) played.

¶45

(v) The petitioner shall put proper mechanism in place and shall ensure that no game(s) is played in any unlawful manner by the member(s). If the jurisdictional police find the game(s) played is / are contrary to any law and in violation of the settled practice, it is open to them to take action against the petitioner and the offenders,

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶47

in accordance with law.

¶48

(vi) The jurisdictional police shall have liberty to visit premises periodically and / or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner’s premises.

¶49

(vii) The respondents are directed not to interfere with the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner’s– Company.

¶50

(viii) It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking the provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the member(s) of the petitioner is / are found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities."

¶51

The directions indicate that the petitioner is required and directed not to permit any activity by any of its members by indulging in the acts of amusement under Sections 2(14) and 2(15) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The petitioner is directed to put up proper mechanism to ensure that no game is played in any unlawful manner. The other obligations are also cast on the petitioner while running its business activities.

¶52

3.1 The contempt is alleged, more particularly in respect of condition Nos.(vi), (vii) and (viii) of the order aforequoted. Thereunder the jurisdictional police is granted liberty to visit

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶54

premises of the petitioner periodically and upon receipt of any information about unlawful activity carried out in the premises in the petitioner, take necessary action in law. While the respondents are directed not to interfere with the recreational activities of the petitioner's company, it is equally made clear that the order would not come in way of the police to invoke the provisions of the Act and taking necessary action in accordance with law against the members of the petitioner if the petitioner is found to be indulging in the immoral or unlawful activities.

¶55

3.2 In the present contempt petition, the case of the petitioner is

¶56

that the police is unnecessarily interfering with the activities of the petitioner and that there is a breach in that regard as the petitioner is not permitted to carry on its recreational activities.

¶57

3.3 From the record it could be seen and it is also admitted in the averments that an FIR is filed against the petitioner by the police authorities concern, which FIR is registered as bearing No.318 of 2024 dated 13.09.2024, the directors and the employees of the complainant's company are arraigned as accused. The FIR is under Section 79 and 80 of the Act. It was filed pursuant to raid conducted by 25 to 30 police officers at the premises of the

¶58

7 -

¶59

NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶60

complainant which is situated at 62, 5^th floor, 43^rd cross road, Jayanagar, Bengaluru. The directors of the complainant were allegedly found to be indulging into the unlawful activities.

¶61

It appears that after the date of passing of the order, the PSI of the Jayanagar Police Station has addressed the communication dated 13.09.2024 where he has requested the Police Inspector of the said Police station to take necessary legal action against the persons who are involved in the illegal gambling in poker club of the petitioner named as M/S Cold Pyramid Private Limited was noticed to be indulging into unlawful activities and immoral conduct through the directors and the employees.

¶62

The allegations are contained in the FIR. They are on the basis of the concrete information and in accordance with law that the police authorities has taken action against the petitioner by filing FIR. In course of hearing of the petitioner, learned advocate stated that the even the second FIR is filed. This aggravates the situation. The contempt petition is thoroughly meritless. No contempt is committed.

¶63

8 -

¶64

NC: 2025:KHC:8954-DB CCC No. 1301 of 2024

¶65

It is observed that the police authorities shall take stern action against the petitioner if proved to be indulging into unlawful activities under the cloak of amusement and recreational activities.

¶66

The contempt petition is dismissed.

¶67

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶68

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶69

PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Cold Pyramid Private Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cold Pyramid Private Limited v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.R. Basavarajappa Vs State of Karnataka

The High Court Legal Services Committee Vs the State of Karnataka

G Shivaramaiah Vs Sri. Ritesh Kumar Singh

Sri M H Krishnegowda Vs Sri R J Kantharaju

Sri. Lokesh. v. S. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Naveen Das Vs the Primary Agricultural Credit Co. Operative Society Ltd.