The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exercise of power under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. should be limited to emergent situations and not for routine matters.

J.K. Maheshwari, J.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by an Association registered in the name of "Restaurant and Lounge Vyapari Association, Bhopal" through its Secretary and one other, assailing the order annexure P/6 dated 4.8.2014 passed by respondent No. 7, by the said order all the Food Safety Officers, Bhopal, were directed to produce a list within two days of all the Hotels, Restaurants serving Hookah, and Hookah Lounge Bars, and after closing them produce the certificate that in the township of Bhopal, in any Hotel or restaurants, no Hookah Lounge bars are running. It has also been directed that continuous surveillance be made by them to ensure compliance of the said direction otherwise they shall be liable to face disciplinary action. The order annexure P/7 dated 22.9.2014 of the District Magistrate, Bhopal, passed in exercise of the power under section 144 of the Cr.P.C. has also been assailed, by the said ex-parte prohibitory order, Hookah Bars/Sheesha Lounges were directed to be seized, otherwise action under section 188 of I.P.C. may be taken. The facts briefly stated in the petition that under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003, hereinafter referred to as "the COTP Act"; and The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Rules, 2004, hereinafter referred to as "the COTP Rules"; and also The Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places Rules, 2008, hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 2008", absolute prohibition of smoking at a public place, i.e. Hotels and restaurants are not specified. However, if the members of the petitioner Association are running their hotels and restaurants and offering hookah following the provisions of the Act and the Rules, it cannot be closed or seized either as per the order, annexure P/6, or by passing ex-parte prohibitory order, annexure P/7 in exercise of power under section 144 of the Cr.P.C. It is further his contention that the order passed by the Collector may remain in operation only for two months, but consecutive orders are made by District Magistrate on expiry of the period of two months. It is said that such power can be evoked only to the anticipated action for time being, however, meaning of word "prohibition" under the Act do not postulate absolute prohibition, however, seizure of Hookah bar hotels and restaurants is not permissible even in exercise of power under section 144 Cr.P.C. Placing reliance on a recent judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Narinder S. Chadha Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, (2015) 3 AD 131 : (2015) 1 SCJ 547, submitted that the court has set aside the order passed by the Bombay, Madras and Gujarat High Courts holding that the restriction imposed in the licence is in contravention to the COTP Act and Rules. It is explained that prohibitory order in exercise of the power under section 144 of Cr.P.C. can be passed only for limited period, however, contended that the blanket direction issued vide annexure P/6 and the prohibitory order of the Collector, annexure P/7, may be quashed.

2. On the other hand, respondents No. 1 to 5, 7 and 8 by filing their return emphasized that as per various press reports about the illegal business run by the Hotel and restaurant owners in the shape of Hookah Bar/Opium Center/Hookah Lounge in uncontrolled manner and also looking to the fact that youngsters including school going students were joining such activities, which reveals from the reports of the C.M.H.O. indicating consumption o' Nicotine, facilitating through Hookah coupled with the flavour of molesis, glycerin and various other chemical substances, however, the orders, annexures P/6 and P/7, have rightly been passed. In support of such contention, reliance has been pl