The 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 issue any writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of lVlandamus declaring the action of the respondents, more particularly respondent Nos.3 to 4 police, their subordinate officers in interfering rnto Business and harassing the petitioner by calling them to the police station as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and rn violation of Art-14 and 2.1 of the constitution of lndia and consequently to direct the respondent Nos.3 to 4 not to interfere in business including direction not to harass the petitioner by calling them to their police station/offices. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petrtion under Section 151 cPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.3 to 4 not to interfere in Busrness including drrection not to harass the petitioner by calling them to their police station/offices and also threatening in phone and pending disposal of the above writ petjtion. I Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAMA KRISHNA KULKARNI, Advocate representing SRI MADHUSUDHAN P Counsel for the Respondents: MR R. LAXMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.32063 OF 2025 ORDER This Writ Petition is filed under Artide 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief: ".--lo rssue any Writ, Order or Direction more padiculady one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the aclion of the respondents, more padicularly, respondent Nos. 3 Io 4 police, their subordinate officers in inteiering lnlo Busrness and harassing the petitioner by calling them to the police station, as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural justice and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequenlty to direct the respondenl Nos. 3 to 4 not to inter-fere rn busrness including direction not fo harass the petitioner by calling them to their potice station/offices and pass such other order or orders . . ."

2. I have heard Mr. Rama Krishna Kulkarni, learned counsel, representing Mr. Madhu Sudhan P, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Laxmikanth Reddy, Iearned Assistant Government pleader for Home, appearing on behalf 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 l r\tR. / ll: P. .\0. )20rt ) of 202; restrictions without any la*ful authority. Therefore, he prayed for necessary directions

4. Learned Assistant Government preader for Home, submits that the act of serving Hookah necessariry impries the suppry of tobacco products. However, the nature of the substances being used in the preparation of flavoured Hookah has not been crearry specified by the petitioner. Apart from certain vague assertions, no specific particurars 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 estabrishments to compry with cenain conditions, and upon such compriance, the respondent porice authorities were directed not to interfere with their business activities. rn 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 Hookah centre under the name and style of 'cafe Story at venkateshwara Enclave, sut;hitra. Jeedimeila, Quthbullapur, Medchat-Markajgiri' and contends that the respondent police authorities, without any regar prescription, are irterfering with his business of serving flavoured Hookah.

7. ln this context, it is pertinent to note that a coordinate Bench of this Court, in W P. No. 15944 of 2022 decided on 0g.12.2022, examined the J N7X./ IY.P. No. )206) ol 202i question as to whether a licence is required for running a Hookah Center under the provisions of lhe Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advedisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 ('COTP Act') and upon due ionsideralion, recorded its conclusion in the following terms: "Though the Act does not contemplate any licence to be taken, in the larger interest of the youngsters, who are visiting the hookah centres, lhe restaurant owners shall have a definite place for hookah / smoking. The restaurant owners, who are having a separate place for smoking and for hookah consumption, shall inform the same to the Station House Officer, so that they can have surveillance on the activities that are taking place in the said place and whether lhe busrness is carried out as per the norms and the procedure laid down under the AcL Police under the guise of this, shall not harass the persons running these centres without following the procedure. The officers, who are competent alone can enter the premises. lf there is any high-handed action on the paft of the police, the same shall be brought to the notice of the higher authorities and they shall cause enquiry into the same and take appropriate 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 pelitioneas business. For ready reference, the relevant directions are reproduced hereunder: "ln the light of the nterim order granted by this Coutl in identical matters, there shall be an order alike in this matter also in the following terms: I -1 NrR,/ ll t) ,\0. )206) ol 202t ff the petitioner installs video cameras, either open cr concealed, Ts6srjs its operations and also undeftakes to ptrsssrvs 1.7, recordings for a minimum of fifteen days period, so thzt the potice, in case of susplc,on or necessity, can replay the footage and examne as to whether any undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequently visiting the petilioner's cafe lor hookah, the petitioner's cafe may be permitleJ to carry on its operations. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would suggest that: i) ii) The Hookah centres shall not be kept open b-.yond 1 1 .00 p m. for its customers. They must necessarily exhibit the signboard that they are Hookah centres; and iii) They must also exhibit lhe notice board that children below the age of 18 are not liable to be enreftained 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 15.112023, concerning the operation of hookah centers The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted hereunder for ready reference: "ln view of the above drscusslon, this Courl is of the ctpinion that imposing of cerlain conditions to run the htookah Centres would meet the ends of justice. t) As Charcoal ts being used for serving hookah in the Hookah Centres, the petilioners shall obtain licence front the Municipal Corporation as specified under Section 521(1)(b) of Greater Hyderabad Municipat Corporatic,n Act, 1955 ii) Since the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fastt confers power over the amusement Centres/resta,rJrants which are defined as "pubtic place" under the COf p Act and as per Rule 4 of the Prohibition of Smoking in oublic P/aces Rules 2008 permission is required spet;ifying smoktng area. Therefore, to estabtish hookah centres. the petitioners shall obtain necessary permission horn the - I \ ) ,\ 11t, / W.P. Na )206) of 202i concerned authority under the provisions of the City Police Act. ii| The 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 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. v) lf there is any violation of the provisions of the COTP Act and the Rules made thereunder, the respondents-po[ice are at libedy to take appropriate action as per the provisions of the COTP Act.

25. Subject to fulfilling the above conditions and also the provisions of COTP Act, the respondents-police are directed not to interfere with the buslness activity of the petitioners for running Hookah Centres. lf the police are found to act in a highhanded manner, the owners of the Hookah Centres are at libefty to bring the same to the notice of the Director General of Police/Commissioner of Police, as directed by this Coutt in Writ Petition No.3202 of 2014 and batch, in which event the said authoity shall forthwith take necessary sfeps rn 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 petitioner to strictly comply with the following directions r. The business place must necessarily exhibit the signboard that they are Hookah Centres; ,: They must also exhibit the notice board that children below the age of 18 are not liable to be entertained as guests, I 6 ,\ 7l{. / t..' t). .\0. )..06) ol 2()2:t even for any other recreational purpose including consumption of coffee inside the Hookah Centres. iii. The Hookah Centres shall not be kept open beyond

11.00 p.m. for its customers; lv. V, The Hookah Centres are prohibited from servrng any tobacco product to the persons below the age of e ghteen years. Pictorial health-warning labels at the entrance must be displayed. 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 periol, so that the police, in case of suspicion or necessity, can replay the footage and examine as to whether an!, undesirable elements or young persons in conflict with law are frequenuy visiting the petitioner,s caf6 for hookah. /r. As Charcoal is being used for serving hookah i1 the Hookah Centres, the petitioner shall obtain licence from the Municipal Corporation as specified under Section 521(1Xb) of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. vii. Since the Hyderabad City police Act, 1348 Fasli confers power over the amusement Centres/Restauran ts which are defined as "public place,, under the COTp Act and as per Rule 4 of the prohibition of Smoking in public places Rules, 2008, permission is required specifying snoking area. Therefore, to establish hookah centres, the petitioner shall obtain necessary permission from the concerned authority qnder the provisions of the City police Act. t lV.P. No. )206) ol 202i 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 provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli' rx. If there is any violation of the provisions of the COTP Act and the Rules made thereunder, the respondents-police 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 otherTobaccoProducts(ProhibitionofAdvertisementandRegulationof Trade and commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 ('COTP Act'), the respondent police authorities are directed not to cause anyinterferenceinthelawfulbusinessactivitiesofthepetitioner.lnthe 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 12 With the above direction, this Writ Petition is allowed' No costs' Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/. A.SREENIVASA REDDY S TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Building, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. The Director General of Poltce, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad. Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. The Station House Officer, Petbasheerabad Police Station, Cyberabad, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. One CC to SRI MADHUSUDHAN P, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOIME, Hrgh Court for the State of Telangana- [OUT] Two CD Copies 2 3 4 6 7 \ To, \P HIGH COURT DATED:2411012025 ORDER WP.No.32063 of 2025 iia- i i,if€\-\ .,- '... t, il DIT flffi i \ .i ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS lro L0 2r