High Court · 2025

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 lssue a writ or order or direction more pa(icularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, restraining the respondents from taking any action against the petitioner in stopping or banning or interfering in the business of the petitioner from serving flavored Hookahs at his shop which is in contravention to provisions of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the business activities of the petitioner serving flavored Hookah in his shop. I I I a l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 2424 OF 2017) Pelition 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 direct the respondents herein not to interfere with the business of the petitioner in serving flavored Hookahs to his customers except in accordance with law, pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G.TUHIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.lto3 :SRl R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY,AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.3 ; SRI G.NARENDER REDDY (SC FOR GPPS) The Court made the following: ORDER / // I 11, n THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PEIITION No.2O8O OF 2Ol7 I ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following reliel "...-to issue a writ or order or direction more particulady one in ttre nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS restraining the respondents from taking any action against the petitioner in stopping or banning or interfering in the business of the petitioner from serving flavored Hookahs at his shop which is in contravention to provisions of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce Production Supply and Distribution Act 2OO3 and consequenfly direct the respondents not to interfere with the business activities of the petitioner serving flavored Hookah in his shop arrd pass...."

2. None appeared for the Petitioner.

3. Heard Mr. R. La:anikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. I to 3.

4. karned Assistant Government Pleader for t.l.e respondents submits tllat t]le act of serving Hookah necessarily irnplies t]le supply of tobacco products. However, the nature of t.Ire substances being used in the preparation of Jlauoured. Haknh has not been clearly specified by the petitioner. Apart from certain vague I l I I 2 assertions, no speciflc 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 wit}r certain conditions, and upon such compliance, the respondent police authorities were directed not to interfere with their business activities. In view of the above, he prays that appropriate orders be passed in the instant matter.

5. I have perused the material on record.

6. The petitioner is running a restaurant under the name and stvle of "126 Restaurant" and contends t]:at the respondent police authorities, without any legal prescription, are interfering with his business of serving flauoured Hookah.

7. In this context, it is pertinent to note that a Coordinate Bench of this Court, in W.P. No. 75944 of 2O12 decided on O8. 12.2022, examined tJle question as to whether a licence is required for running a Hookah @nter under the provisions of the Cig.arettes and Ctther Tobff Products (Prohibition of Aduerti.sement and Regulation of I I 3 Tlade and Commer@, Produdion, Supplg and Distribution) Act, 2OO3 ('COTP ActJ and upon due consideration, recorded its conclusion in the following terms: 'Though the Act does not contemplate any licence to be taften, in the larger interest of the youngsters, who are visiting the hookah centres, t}re restaurant owners shall have a dehnite place for hookah / smoking. The restaurant owners, who are havi.rrg a separate place for smoking and for hookah consumption, sha-ll inform the same to the Station House Offrcer, so t]:at t]:ey can have surveillance on the activities that are taking place in the said place and whether the business is carried out as per t.I:e norms and the procedure laid down under ttre Act. Police under the guise of this, shall not ha-rass the persons running these centres without following the procedure. The ollicers, who are competent alone carr enter the premises. If there is any high-handed action on the part of t]:e police, the same shall be brought to ttre notice of the higher authorities and they shall cause enquiry into the same and take appropriate action."

8. Furthermore, in an alalogues matter, this Court issued certain directions and, upon compliance by the petitioner, restraind the respondent police from interfering with the petitioner's business. For ready reference, the relevart directions are reproduced hereunder: "tn the light of the interim order grant€d by this Court in identical matters, there shall be an order alike in this matter also in the following terms: ll the petitioner installs video cameras, either open or concealed, records its operations and also undertakes to preserve the recordings for a minimum of fifteen days period, so that the police, in case of suspicion or necessity, can replay the footage and exarnin€ as to I t I ! I i l: I I I 4 whether any undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequently visiting the petitioner's caf6 for hookah, the petitioner's <=f6 may be permitted to carrJ. on its operations. [.€arned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Home would suggest that: i) ii) iii) The Hookah centres shall not be kept open beyond 1 1.0o p.m. for its customers; They must necessarily exhibit the signboard that tiey are Hookah c€ntres; and 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 \V.P. No. 8223 of 2013 and connected matters, decided on

15.L1.2O23, concerrring the operation of hookah centers. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted hereunder for ready reference: "ln view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion that imposing of certain conditiona ,to run the Hookah Centres would meet the ends of justice. i). As Charcoal is being used for serving hookah in the Hookah Centres, the petitioners shall obtain licence from the Municipal Corporation as specified under Section 521(1Xb| of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporati,on Act, 1955. ii). Since the Hyderabad City Police Act, l3z+8 Fasli confers power over the amusement Centres/restau rants which are dehned as "public place" under the COTP Act and as p,er Rule 4 of the Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, 20O8 permission is required specifying smoking f, 5 area- Therefore, to establish hookah centres, the petitioners shall obta.in necessarj. permission from tJle concerned authority under the provisions of the City Police Act. iii). The Hookah Centres ar€ prohibited from serving any tobacco product to the persons below the age of eighteen years. Pictorial health-warning labels at ttre entrance must be displayed iv). The 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 provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli. vl. If there is any violation of the provisions of the COTP Act and the Rules made thereunder, t}le respondents-police are at liberty to take appropriate action as per the pmvisions of the COTP Act. 25. Subject to futfilling the above conditions and also the provisions of COTP Act, the respondents-police are directed not to interfer€ with the business activity of the petitioners for running Hookah Centres. If the police are found to act in a highhanded manner, tJle owners of the Hookah Centres are at liberty to bring the same to the notice of the Director General of Potice/Comrnissioner of Police, as directed by this Court in Writ Petition No.3202 of 2014 and batch, in which event the said authority shall forthwith take necessary steps in that regard."

10. [n view of the setfled legal principles discussed hereinabove, and there being no distinguishing features or exceptional circumstances brought to t]1e notice of ttris Court warranting a deviation, it is considered just and appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition by directing the petitioner to strictly comply with the following directions. i I I I i l '1 'l i I 6 i The business place must necessarily exhibit the signboard that they are Hookah c€ntIes; u" They must a.lso 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 Hookaik Centres. iu The Hookah centr€s shall not be kept open beyond 11-OO p.m. for its customers; iu. The Hookah Centres are prohibited from sewing any tobacco product to the persons below the age of eighteen years. Pictorial health-warning labels at the entrance must be displayed u. If the petitioner shall install video cameras, either open or concealed, records its operations and shall preserve t}te recordings for a minimum of thirty days period, so t}Iat t}Ie police, in case of suspicion or necessity, carl replay t1.e footage and examine as to whether any undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequently visiting ttre petitioner's caf€ for hookah u'r'. As Charcoal is being used for serving hookah in the Hookah Centres, the petitioners shall obtain licence from the Municipal Corporation as specilid under Section 521(1)(b) of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. rzi. Since the Hyderabad City Police Act, 132+8 Fasli confers power over amusement Centres/restaurants which are dehned as 'public place" under the COTP Act and as per Rule 4 of the 6 - Prohibition of Smoking in Pubtic Places Rules, I \ 7 2OO8 permission is required sPeci&ing smoking area. Therefore, to establish hookah centres, tlre petitioners shalt obtain nec€ssary pennission from the concerned authority under the provisions of tl:e City Potice Act. uiii. Th€ 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 provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli. ir If there is alry violation of the provisions of the COTP Act and the Rules made tJrereunder, the respondents-police erre at liberty to take appropriate action as per the provisions of tJre COTP AcL 1 1. 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, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (.COTP ActJ, the respondent police authorities are directed not to cause any interference in the lawful business activities of tJre petitioner. In the event of any deviation by the petitioner, it shall be open to the respondent police authorities to initiate and pursue appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. :'. ..\ t, I i 8

12. With the above direction, this Writ petition is allowed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. / To, //TRUE COPY// 1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Sec Hyderabad. SD/. M.NAGAMANI ISTANT REGI N OFFICER Telangana State,

2. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. 3. The Executive fficer, Gram Panchayat, Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

4. One CC to SRI G.TUHIN KUMAR, Advocate. [OPUCI 5. One CC to SRI G.NARENDER REDDY, (SC FoR GPPS). [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies. BSK BSR ?*c.. I \ HIGH COURT DATED:1710912025 I 'tHE S Te t'J Oo 2 0 Jui 2u6 Itl t a ./ ORDER WP.No.2080 of 2017 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ?ru.. :z\.t\ra '