K. C. Cinema (Correct Name K C Theatre) vs State of Jammu and Kashmir

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 64

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
K. C. Cinema (Correct Name K C Theatre) – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr R.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Shivang Rawat, Adv. Ms Radhika Jalan, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Nanda, Adv. Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Narang, Adv. Mr. Dhritiman Roy, Adv. Mr. Madhavam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ayushman Kacker, Adv. Ms. Sania Abbasi, Adv. Akhila, Adv. M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Shivam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Diwas Kumar, Adv. Ms. Twinkle, Adv. Mr. Raj Kishor Choudhary, AOR By Courts Motion, AOR Mr. Munawwar Naseem, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, Sr.Adv. Mr. Aditya Sharma, Adv Dr. Nilakshi Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Atul Mahan, Adv. Ms. Purnima Jauhari, AOR Ms. Taruna Ardhendumauli Prasad, AOR Mrs. Mrinal Elker Mazumdar, Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, AOR Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Sabharwal, Adv. Mr. Akshay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vinayaka. S. Pandit, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Ms. Kirti Dadheech, Adv. Mr. Sahil Narang, Adv. Mr. Dhritiman Roy, Adv. Mr. Madhavam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ayushman Kacker, Adv. Ms. Sania Abbasi, Adv. M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Nanda, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.

Table of Contents
A.	Background
B.	Cases relied upon by the respondents
C.	The High Court has transgressed its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution
D.	Parting remarks

Civil Appeal Nos 77, 78 and 79 of 2023

1. Leave granted.

A. Background

2. This batch of appeals arises from a judgment dated 18 July 2018 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. A public interest litigation was instituted before the High Court by two practicing advocates with the grievance that cinema theatres in Jammu and Kashmir were prohibiting movie goers from bringing eatables inside cinema halls. In this context, it was averred that cinema owners paste a notice outside the hall indicating the prohibition and that security personnel search the belongings of every cinema goer with a view to enforce the prohibition. In the event that movie goers are found in possession of eatables, they are (it was alleged) prevented from entering the cinema hall.

3. The submission which was urged before

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 64

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHAK. C. Cinema (Correct Name K C Theatre) – AppellantVersusState of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent

Cases Referred (7)

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
K. C. Cinema (Correct Name K C Theatre) – Appellant
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir – Respondent