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 lssue writ order or direction one in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus by declaring the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 19-09-20'17 is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in the business activities of the petitioner in the premises bearing No. 6-2- 291, Sadana Building, Hyderguda, Hyderabad in the interest of justice l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 40469 OF 2017 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 suspend the operation of the impugned order dated 1g-09-2017 and consequenfly direct the respondents not to interfere in the business activities of the petitioner in the premises bearing no. 6-2-29i, Sadana Building, Hyderguda, Hyderabad pending disposal of the above writ petition. I * i. * 4 -* l& l.A. NO: 2 OF ?017(WPMP.NO: a+218 O Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c;ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petrtroner to correct the Typographical mistake which avertedly caused in Address of the Petrtioner House Number i.e. "H.No. 392/1" should be replaced with "H.No. 3-1 -39217" and Business Premises Municipal Number i.e. "6-2-291" should be replaced with "3-6-291" pending disposal the aborre writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PRATAP NARAYAN SANGHI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI M. SRINIVAS, ASSl'. GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER / !' * 4 4 * d 4 4 * e I * r-) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.32525 OF 2017 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief/s:- -. .. to issue writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 19.9.2017 is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to inter'rere in the business activities of the petitioner rn the premises bearing No.6-2-291, Sadana Building. ilyderguda. Hyderabad

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioners

3. Heard l\/r. lVl.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the Executive lVlagistrate, upon considering the report and circumstances presented by the concerned police authorities. issued the impugned notice. lt is further submitted that as the petitioner failed to comply with the directions contained therein, the authorities proceeded further, resulted in the closure of the business premises. The said action was taken solely on the . ground that the petitioner's business establishment was allegedly causing public nuisance. Therefore, it is conterrded that the petitloner's allegations are devoid of substance. and accordingly, the learned Government Pleader prays for dismissal of the writ petition

5. lhave perused the material on record

6. The grievance of the petitioner is directed against the impugned notice dated 19.09.2017 issued by the thrrd respondent under Section .1 33 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C ") lt has been stated that the Executive Magistrate, who is the second respondent herein, issued the said nctice directing the petitioner to close the Snooker Parlour within 48 hours on the grounds of pLrblic nuisance. rowdy behaviour in the vicinity, and the alleged location of the business in a residential area. Per contra, in the supporting affidavit, the petitioner asserts that the establishment is situated within a commercial building, operates with due permission, complies with all safety norms rand is under constant CCTV surveillance. lt is further contended that there have been no complaints from the general public, nor is there any evidence of nuisance or violence traceable to ther petitioner's prem rses -) /

7. Section '1 33 Cr.P.C. empowers an Executive lvlagistrate to issue a conditional order requiring the removal of unlawful obstructions or nuisances, or to regulate or prohibit certain activities that may pose a threat to public safety, health, or convenience. The provisron is preventive and summary in nature and not punitive. lt is well settled that the exercise of power under Section 133 Cr P.C. must be based on credible material showing the existence of an unlawful obstruction or public nursance affecting the community at large

8. The Supreme Court in C.A Avarachan v C V Sreenivasan, (1996) 7 SCC 7'l , held that the ltlagistrate's power under Section 133 Cr.P.C. is not unbridled and should be invoked only when there ls clear and convincing evidence of public nuisance. The provision contemplates a two-stage process initially, the Magistrate may issue a conditional order under Section 133 Cr.P.C., calling upon the person concerned either to remove the nuisance or to appear and show cause against the order. Thereafter, under Section 135 Cr.P.C., the person has a right to be heard. U pon considering the explanation, if the Magistrate finds the cause unsatisfactory, the conditional order . may be made absolute under Section 'l 38 Cr.P.C. I \ \ .+

9. Sections 137 to 143 Cr.P.C. further envisage that before finalizing such an order, the lVlagistrate must conduct an inquiry to ascertain the existence of the alleged nuisance or obstruction and only upon due satisfaction and observance of procedural safeguards can an order be made absolute

10. ln the present case, the record does not disclose that any such inquiry was conducted or that the petitioner was afforded an opportunity of hearing AS required under Sections .l 35 to 138 Cr.P.C. The impugned action appears to have been taken solely on the basrs of the initial notice, without following the mandatory procedural steps prescribed by law. A direction to close the business premises within 48 hours, based merely on the allegation of "rowdy behaviour" and "public nuisance." without establishing credible evidence of imminent threat to public order or safety, cannot be sustained

11. Nloreover, the respondent authorities have not pleaded that any inquiry or local inspection was conducted to verify the alleged nuisance, or that any order was made absolute in accordance with Sections 137 and 138 Cr.P.C. Likewise, there is no record of compliance with the conditional enforcement measures or penalty procedures envisaged under Sections 139 to 143 Cr.P.C

12. ln the circumstances. the impugned notice dated

19.09.2017 and the consequential action taken pursuant thereto, having been issued and executed in violation of the mandatory procedural safeguards under Chapter X of the Cr.P.C., cannot be legally sustained and accordingly setaside 'l 3. However, it is made clear that thrs order shall not preclude the competent authority or the Executive lt/agistrate from initiating appropriate proceedings afresh, should the cause of public nuisance or safety concerns still persist, by strictly adhering to the procedure established by law and affording the petitioner due opportunity of hearing as mandated under the Code

14. With this direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No COSTS lVliscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed SD/-B. REKHA RANI ISTANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY' ECTION OFFICER Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, The State of Telangana, . The Special Executive lvlagistrate, Hyderabad District. Hyderabad. . One CC to SRI PRATAP NARAYAN SANGHI, Advocate-[OPUC] . Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] . Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana. 2 3 4 5 IOUTI TWoCD Copi:S. 6 E I I : * To, HIGH COURT DATED:1 411012025 t. OROER . -=-.:=:'-. /{. .,:. .t r\ ,) 2l 0[I mt WP.No.32525 of 2017 pAIrtH Lr) DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS a + * 4 " * * * {t 1o J 1i