THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue any Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, more particularly, respondent Nos. 3 to 4 police, their subordinate officers in interfering into Business 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 India 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 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, learned 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 restrictions without any lawful authority. Therefore, he prayed for necessary directions.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, submits that the act of serving Hookah necessarily implies the supply of tobacco products. However, the nature of the substances being used in the preparation of flavoured Hookah has not been clearly specified by the petitioner. Apart from certain vague assertions, no specific particulars 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 establishments to comply with certain conditions, and upon such compliance, the respondent police authorities were directed not to interfere with their business activities. In 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 ‘Signature Café Story at Madhapur, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District’ and contends that the respondent police authorities, without any legal prescription, are interfering with his business of serving flavoured Hookah.

7. In this context, it is pertinent to note that a Coordinate Bench of this Court, in W.P. No. 15944 of 2022 decided on 08.12.2022, examined the question as to whether a licence is required for running a Hookah Center under the provisions of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (‘COTP Act’) and upon due consideration, 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, the 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 the business is carried out as per the norms and the procedure laid down under the Act. 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. If there is any high-handed action on the part of the police, the same shall be brought to the notice of the higher authorities and they shall cause enquiry into the same and