Sayeed Bin Ali Mujaidi v. State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a'writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking away the articles from the petitioner's premises in the first floor, H.No.18-12-418110158, Hafeez Baba Nagar, Hyderabad and in closing.down his business as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violative and violation of Articles 14 and 19(1 )(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to return the aiticles taken away from the petitioners business premises and allow him to continue his business of serving flavoured hookahs in their shootez, snookers and lounge without any hindrance or restrictions except under law. l.A. NO: I OF 2016(WPMP. NO:41043 oF 2016) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to return the articles taken away from the petitioner's business premises at the first floor, H.No.18-12-418110158, Hafeez Baba Nagar, Hyderabad and atlow him to conduct his business, pending disposat of the writ pet:ition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAVI GADEELA Counsel for the Respondents: Gp FOR HOME The Court merde the following: ORDER .i A.) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI N No.33206 OR ER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief: "...fo issue a writ, order or direction, more pafticularly, one in the nature of mandamus declaing the action of the respondents in taking away the articles from the petitionels premises in the first floor, H. No. 18-12-418/10/58, Hafeez Baba Nagar, Hyderabad, and in closing down his business, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principtes of naturaljustice and viotative and viotation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondents to return the articles taken away from the petitioner's bustness premises and allow him to continue his busrness of seruing flavoured hookahs in their shooterz, snookers and lounge without any hindrance or restrictions except under law and pass such other order or orders. .."

2. I have heard ttlr. Ravi Gadeela, Iearned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Asslstant Government Pleader appearing on beh'alf of the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner pleads that seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to continue his business on serving flavoured Hookah without any hindrance or restriction except under law. The respondent police authorities are interfering in the name of regulation and imposing unreasonable 2 N]R,/ IV.P. No. 3t206 of 2016 restrictions without any lawful authority. Therefore, he prayed for necessar), directions.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, submits that the act of senting Hookah necessarily implies the supply of tobacco products. However, the nature of the substances being used in the preparation of flavoured Hookah has not been clearly specified by the petitioner. Apart from certain vague assertions, no specific particulars have been furnished as to the alleged manner of interference by the respondent authorities. However, fairly concedes that in similar matters this Court has directed petitioners/business establishments to comply with certain conditions, and upon suctt compliance, the respondent police authorities were directed not to intelrfere with their business activities.. ln view of the above, he prays that appropriate orders be passed in the instant matter.

5. I harre perused the material on record.

6. The petitioner is running a Hookah centre under the name and style of 'f:un Time Parlour, at Hafeez Baba Nagar, Hyderabad' and t contends that the respondent police authorities, without any legal prescription, are interfering witn 'nis business of serving flavoured Hookah.

7. ln this context, it is pertinent to note that a Coordinate Bench of this court, in v/.P. No. 1sg44 of 2012 decided on 08. 12.2022, examinedther a-- J A'TR,/ IV.P. No. fi206 of 2016 question as to whether a licence is required for running a Hookah center I I under the provisions of lhe Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Adveftisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Suppty and Distibution) Act, 2003 ('COTP Act') and upon due consideration, recorded its conclusion in the following terms: 'Though the Act does not contemplate any licence to be taken, in the targer interest of the youngsters, who are visiting the hookah centres, the restaurant owners shall have a definite place for hookah / smoking. The restauranl owners, who are having a separate place for smoWng and for hookah consumption, shatl inform the same to the Station House Officer, so that they can have suryeillance on the activities that are taking ptace in the said place and whether the buslhess is canied out as per the norms and the procedure laid down under the Act- Pdice under the guise of this, shall not harass the persons running these centres without fotlowing the procedure. The officers, who are competent alone can enter the premises. lf there is any high'handed action on the paft of the potice, the same shall be brought to the notice of the higher authorities and they shall cause enquiry into the same and t a ke a ppropri ate action. "

8. Furthermore, in an analogues matter, this Court issued certain directions and, upon compliance by the . petitioner, restrained the respondent police from interfering with the petitioner's business' For ready reference, the relevant directions are reproduced hereunder: "ln the light of the interim order granted by this Coutt in identical matters,-there shalt be an order atike in this mafter also in the following terms: lf the petitioner installs video cameras, either open or concealed, records its operations and also undeftakes to preserve the recordings for'a minimum of fifteen days peiod, so that the police, in case of suspicion or necessity, can replay the footage and examine as to whether any undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequently visiting the petitioner's 4 Nry&/ IV.P. No. fi206 of 2016 cafe for hookah, the petitioner's cafe may be permifted to carry on its operations. Leamed Assisfanf Govemment Pleader for Home woukl suggest that: i) The Hookah centres shall not be kept open beyond 11.00 p.m. for its customers; ii) They must necessarily exhibit the signboard that they are Hookah centres; and iii) They must also exhibit the notice board that children below the age of 18 are not liable to be entertained as guests, even for any other recreational purpose including consumption of coffee inside the Hookah Centres." 9. That apart, a batch of Writ Petitions filed by persons similarly placed as the petitioner was considered in W.P. No. 8223 of 2013 and connected matters, decided on 15.1 1.2023, concerning the operation of hookah centers. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted hereunder lbr ready reference: "ln vietw of the above discussion, this Courl is of the opinion that ,lmposing of ceftain conditions to run the Hookah Centres would meet the ends of justice. i). As Charcoal is being used for serving hookah in the Hookith Centres, the petitioners shall obtain licence from the l,/lunicipal Corporation as specified under Section 521(1)(b) of Greater Hyderabad Municipat Corporation AOt, 1955. ii). Sr,hce the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasti confe,.s power over the amusement Centres/restaurants which are defined as 'public place" under the COTp Act and as per Rule 4 of the Prohibition of Smoking in public Place.s Rules, 2008 permission is required specifying smoking area. Therefore, to establish hookah centres, the petitioners shall obtain necessary permission from the concemed authority under the provisions of the City police Act. ii|. The Hookah Centres are prohibited from serving any tobac<:o product to the persons below the age of eighteen years. Pictoial health-waming labets at the entrance must be dis,olayed. f ArT&/ IY.P. Na )3206 of 20t6 iv). The respondents-police are-at liberty to superuise 'aid inspect the Hookah'Centres, for any violation of rules i,ni regutations, guidelines or circulars issued under the i,rinir-in" of the ilyderabad city potice Act, 1348 Fasli. v). tf there is any violati9n of the provisions. of the COfp Act and tne Rules made thereunder' the i"ipona"nts_police are at liberty to take appropriate action as'per the provisions of the COTP Ac[

25.subjecttofulfitlingtheaboveconditionsandalsothe piovisions of COTC Act, the respondents-9o.lice are 'directed not to inbrtere with the bustness activity of the p,"iitin"rt for running Hookah Centres' lf the police are ,foundtoactinahig.-hhandedmanner,theownersofthe Hookah Centres ai at libefty to bing the same to the notice of the Diretctor Generat of Potice/commissioner of Police,asdirectedbythisCourtinWitPetitionNo.3202of 2014andbatch,inwhicheventthesaidauthoityshall forlhwith take necessa4y sfeps in that regard'"

10. ln view of the settled legal principles discussed hereinabove' and there being no distinguishing features or exceptional circumstances brought to the notice of this Court warranting a deviation' it is considered just and appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the petitionertostrictlycomplywiththefollowingdirections. l, The business place must necessarily exhibit the signboard that theY are Hookah Centres; r ii.Theymustalsoexhibitthenoticeboardthatchildrenbelow theageoflBarenotliabletobeenteftainedasguests, even for any other recreational purpose including consumption of coffee inside the Hookah Centres' iii. The Hookah Centres shall not be kept open beyond ^ .n

11.00 P.m. for its customers; \ \ --]l 6 NTlt/ IV.P. No. 31206 of 2016 iv. Ihe Hookah Centres are prohibited from seruing any tobacco product to the persons below the age of eighteen years. Pictorial health-warning labels at the entrance must be displayed. rz. If the petitioner shall install video cameras, either open or concealed, records its operations and shall preserve the recordings for a minimum of thirty days period, so that the police, in case of suspicion or necessity, can replay the lootage and examine as to whether any undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequently /isiting the petitioner's caf6 for hookah. vr. .As Charcoal is being used for serving hookah in the Hookah ,3entres, the petitioner shall obtain licence from the Municipal 3orporation as specified under Section 521(1Xb) of Greater {yderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. ri: :since the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli confers lower over the amusement Centres/Restaurants which are ,lefined as "public place" under the COTP Act and as per lule 4 of the Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, :2008, permission is required speciffing smoki'ng area. 'l-herefore, to establish hookah centres, the petitioner shall ()btain necessary permission from the concerned authority r:nder the provisions of the City Police Act. viii. 'fhe respondents-police are at liberty to supervise and inspect the Hookah Centres, for any violation of rules and regulations, guidelines or circulars issued under the l)rovisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli. ,\ 7 v.P.No.332o6w tx. If there is any vioration of the provisions or tne corp Act and the Rures made thereunder, the respondents-porice are at liberty to take appropriate action as per the provisions of the COTp Act. 11' Subject to the petitioner's strict compliance with the conditions stipulated hereinabove, and with the provisions of the cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and commerce, production, suppry and Distribution) Act, 2003 ('COTP Act'), the respondent police authorities are directed not to cause any interference in the laMul business activities of the petitioner. ln the event of any deviation by the petitioner, it shail be open to the respondent police authorities to initiate and pursue appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. 12 with the above direction, this writ petition is afiowed No costs Pending misceltaneous applications, if any, shatt stan d closed That Rule Nisi has been made absotute as above witness The HoN'BLE THE cHtEF JUSTIGE APARESH KUMAR stNGH, wednesday' Ttr-e Twenty Fourth Day of september Two Thousand And Twenty Five SD/. P.C. SULEKHA DEVI ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER To, Buildings, Hyderabad

1. The Principal Secretary, Home De partment, State of Telangana, Secretariat 2. The commissioner of police, Hyderabad potice commissionerate, 3. The Deputv commissioner of porice,.sogth Zone, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Crl*a-. , 4 .TneStationHouseOfficer,KanchanbaghPoliceStation'Kanchanbagh' Hyderabad. . One CC to liRl RAVI GADEELA, Advocate [OPUC] 5 . i*o cc" to cp FOR HOME, High court forthe state of Telangana. [oUT] 6 7. Two CD Copies BN TJ TW I I HIGH COURT DATED i12410912025 r o() t * T trH s t 1 5 r-t I ?Wfr * ORDER WP.No.3:3206 of 201G \ \ , / ) / ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS @- JK blrlze