L.H.PRINCE CLUB, LINGADEERANAHALLI PRINCE CLUB v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
the present writ petition is disposed of with the following
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Registration Act, 1908
- Karnataka Police Act, 1963 ss. 2, 2(14), 2(15)
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P. No.22854/2022, wherein, under similar circumstances, appropriate directions were issued by referring to the authoritative pronouncement of the Division Bench of this Court in D.V.R Recreation Club Vs State…
Judgment
(BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NOT THE PETITIONER TO OBTAIN THE LICENSE TO CARRY IN LAWFUL ACTIVITIES PERTAINING TO THE PETITIONER'S RECREATION CLUB EITHER UNDER THE LICENCING AND CONTROLLING OF THE PLACES OF PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT AMUSEMENT ACT OR UNDER KARNATAKA POLICE ACT AND NOT TO INTERFERE IN THE PLAY OF SKILL DART RUMMY (NONGAMBLING) JACKPOT, CORDS, CAROM, SKILL-BASED GAMES AND ETC. SNOOKER, CHESS, GAMES LIKE, THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioner – a Registered Recreation club – has approached this Court under Article 226 of Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus against - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:17368 WP No. 9495 of 2026 HC-KAR respondents, restraining them from interfering with the lawful activities carried on by the petitioner/club. It is specifically contended that the activities of the petitioner- club are confined to indoor recreational games such as Carom, Chess, Snooker, Rummy(nongambling), jackpot, cords, skill-based games etc. conducted in the name and style of L.H. Prince Club, and that no unlawful or prohibited activities are being conducted in the premises.
It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner/club is a duly registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 having been registered before the Registrar of Societies vide Registration No. DRB4/SOR/33/2025-2026
16.05.2025. The petitioner asserts that the petitioner/club has been established exclusively for recreational purposes and is functioning strictly in accordance with its bye-laws.
The grievance projected in the writ petition is that respondents are repeatedly visiting the premises of the - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:17368 WP No. 9495 of 2026 HC-KAR petitioner/club without any justifiable cause and are interfering with the peaceful conduct of indoor recreational activities. It is alleged that such interference has not only disrupted the functioning of the Club but has also resulted in intimidation and threats to discontinue the activities of the Club.
Operative part
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P. No.22854/2022, wherein, under similar circumstances, appropriate directions were issued by referring to the authoritative pronouncement of the Division Bench of this Court in D.V.R Recreation Club Vs State of Karnataka rendered in W.A.No.20090/2015. In the light of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench and the consistent view taken by this Court in subsequent matters, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: a. The petitioner shall install within a period of six weeks, CC TV cameras, at all the - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:17368 WP No. 9495 of 2026 HC-KAR places of access to its members and also at all the places, wherein game/s is/are played by the members. The CC TV footage of at least prior 15 days’ period shall be made available by the petitioner, to the police, as and when called upon to do so. b.
The petitioner shall issue identity card(s) to all its member(s), which shall be produced by the member(s), when called upon by the police, during the raid(s) and surveillance etc. c. The petitioner shall not permit any activity by any of its member(s), by indulging in acts of amusement, falling within the definition of Sections.2(14) & 2(15) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 and shall not permit any game(s) of chance as per Explanation (II) of Sub-section (7) of Section 2 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963. The member(s) shall not be allowed to play any kind of game(s) with stakes or make any profit or gain out of the game(s) played, except games of skills. - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:17368 WP No. 9495 of 2026 HC-KAR d. The petitioner shall put proper mechanism in place and shall ensure that no game(s) is played in any unlawful manner by the member(s). If the police find that any of the game/s played is/are contrary to any law and in violation of the settled practice, it is open for them to take action against petitioner offenders, accordance with law. e.
The jurisdictional police shall have liberty to visit premises periodically and/or on receipt of any information about any unlawful activity being carried on in the petitioner’s premises. f. The respondents are directed not to interfere with lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner – Club/Association. g. It is made clear that this order would not come in the way of the jurisdictional police invoking the provisions of the Act and taking action in accordance with law, if the member(s) of the petitioner are - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:17368 WP No. 9495 of 2026 HC-KAR found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the present writ petition is disposed of with the following
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Registration Act, 1908; Karnataka Police Act, 1963 — ss. 2, 2(14), 2(15).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.