IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NO.7943/2019(GM-POLICE) Between:
The Officials Recreation Centre, (The officials club), By its Secretary, Jayasrinivas M.
Aged about 52 years, Near Private Bus Stand, Chitradurga – 577501. ... Petitioner (By Sri Spoorthy Hegde.N., Adv.) And:
1. The Government of Karnataka Represented by its Secretary Home Department, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Chitradurga – 577501.
3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Chitradurga – 577501.
4. The Circle Inspector, Chitradurga Town, Town Police Station, Chitradurga – 577501. ... Respondents (By Sri Vijaykumar A. Patil, AGA) This Writ Petition is are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents not to interfere in the day to day recreational activities carried by the petitioner association at the petitioners premises and not to insist upon the petitioner to obtain the licence to carry on lawful activities in the premises of the petitioner’s association, either under the Police Act or under the provisions of licensing and controlling of place of public amusement order and not to interfere in the play of skill oriented games like rummy, chess, snooker / billiards and carom etc., which are the games of skill as held by this Hon’ble Court in various writ petitions.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Learned AGA is directed to take notice for the respondents.
2. The petitioner filed the above writ petition for a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing respondents not interfere with the day to day functions and recreational activities carried on by the petitioner - recreation club in the interest of justice and equity.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a social recreation club registered in the year 1968 under the Societies Registration Act in the name and style ‘ The Officials Club’ and thereafter name changed as ‘The Officials Recreation Centre’. The petitioner is conducting indoor and outdoor games to its members. The petitioner is also affiliated with various other institutes, clubs, associations within the State.
4. It is further contended that the petitioner - recreation club is conducting games such as chess, rummy, snooker/ billiards etc. to its members only. The premises of the petitioner is having facilities of canteen, parking area, waiting hall, library all under the surveillance of CC TV and digital video recording. All the members are issued with ID Cards. The premises of the petitioner is not a public place. Learned counsel in support of aforesaid contentions has produced photographs as per Annexures - D to H and J, K, L. The petitioner further contended that the respondents are interfering with the activities of the petitioner club and insisting for obtaining licence either under the Police Act or under the provisions of Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order and hence, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
6. Sri. Spoorthy Hegade N., learned counsel for the petitioner - club contended that the petitioner is running the recreation club in accordance with law and has not violated any rules and regulations made by the authorities from time to time and in spite of the same the Police authorities are interfering unnecessarily. He further contended that interference of the police authorities is in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the provisions of Article 19(g) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner sought to allow the writ petition.
7. Per contra, Sri Vijaykumar A. Patil, learned AGA appearing for the respondents contended that if the petitioner violated any of the rules and regulations, it is for the police to take action in accordance with law. There is no material documents produced by the petitioner alleging interference by the police officers and it is only an apprehension of the petitioner.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.
9. In view of the aforesaid vital contentions, the writ petition is disposed off with the following terms and conditions:-
“ (i) The petitioner shall install CC TV cameras at all the places of access to its members and also at all the places, wherein game(s) is/are played by the members within a period of six weeks, if not already installed. The CC TV footage of at least prior 15 days period shall be made available by the petitioner to the jurisdictional police, as and when called upon to do so.
(ii) The petitioner shall issue identity card(s) to all its member(s), if not already issued, which shall be produced by the member(s), when called upon by the concerned police, during the raid(s), surveillance, etc.
(iii) The petitioner shall not allow any non- member(s) or the guest(s) of the member(s) to make use of its premises for the purpose of playing any kind of games or recreational activities.
(iv) The petitioner shall not permit any activity by any of its member(s), by indulging in acts of amusement, falling within the definition of Ss.2(14) & 2(15) of the Act 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.
(v) 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 jurisdictional police find that the game(s) played is/are contrary to any law and in violation of the settled practice, it is open to them to take action against the petitioner and the offenders, in accordance with law.
(vi) 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.
(vii) The respondents are directed not to interfere with the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner’s- Club/Association.
(viii) 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 is/are found to have indulged in any unlawful or immoral activities.”
No order as to costs.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance for the respondents within two weeks.
Sd/- JUDGE sac*