Allowed

Dyota v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Apr 2024CW/4108/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a coordinate bench disposal, the High Court of Rajasthan issued directions regarding hookah parlours, exempting actions if COTPA provisions are complied with, while empowering officers not below SubInspector rank to take action on violations.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed on terms that actions against hookah parlours are barred if COTPA is complied with, but police officers SubInspector and above can act on violations.

Dyota Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:15243]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4108/2024

¶4

Dyota, Plot No. 55/19, 01, Gram Basani, Jodhpur (Raj.) 342001 Through Owner Ayush Sankhla S/o Sh. Jai Singh Sankhla.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Home Secretary Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur Rajasthan

¶8

Commissioner Of Police, Near Rotary Circle Jodhpur. 3. Additional Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Near Rotary Circle, Jodhpur.

¶9

Station House Officer, Basani Police Station Jodhpur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Hardik Gautam
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Ayush Gehlot for
		Mr. Rajesh Panwar,Sr. Adv-cum-AAG

¶12

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

¶13

Order

¶14

05/04/2024

¶15

Learned counsel for the parties have jointly shown an order passed by the Coordinate Bench at Jaipur passed in SBCWP No.15620/2022 : The Socialite & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. alongwith other connected matters, decided on 17.07.2023 and thus, seek similar order/directions for the present petition also. The order dated 17.07.2023 is reproduced

¶16

hereunder:-

¶17

“With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these writ petitions stand disposed of with the following terms:-

¶18

I) As long as the petitioners comply with the provisions of COTPA and do not serve any prohibited substances in the hookah parlour then no action can be taken against them. However, it is made clear that

(2 of 2)

[2024:RJ-JD:15243]

[CW-4108/2024]

if it is found that the petitioners are selling/using any substances prohibited under the COTPA then surely an action can be taken against them.

¶23

II) In case, there is any violation of the provisions of the COTPA as amended in the year 2020, the police officer, not below the rank of the SubInspector, as empowered to take legal action for the infringement of the conditions imposed under COTPA as well as taking action on the hookah parlours where drugs/narcotics/Tobacco are provided and consumed which falls under the purview of Police Department.”

¶24

In light of the aforequoted order; the present writ petition as

¶25

well as stay application are also disposed of on the same terms.

¶26

All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶27

(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J

¶28

399-ajayS/devesh-

Dyota v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dyota v. State of Rajasthan

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

M/S Prakash Raychand Bishnoi Vs Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. (Rsfcsc)

The State of Rajasthan Vs Acharya Shri Bhikshu Samadhi Sthal Sansthan

Chetan Purohit Vs Temple Board

Smt. Sarika Goel Vs Smt. Suchi

Shrinath Lohiya Vs Narendras Lrs and Anr.

Rachna Kanwar Vs Hadman Singh Alias Hanuman Singh