Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Ramesh K. Shetty, proprietor of Ramesh Bar and Restaurant in Navi Mumbai, held an eating house license under Section 33(xa) and a public entertainment license under Sections 33(w) and (y) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. On 4 November 2010, the local police inspected the establishment at 12:15 am and found 10 lady waitresses making obscene gestures and being in close physical contact with customers. Consequently, a criminal complaint was filed under Sections 110 and 117 of the Bombay Police Act, and a report was made to the Licensing Authority. Based on this report, a show cause notice was issued on 7 April 2011, to which the petitioner replied on 25 April 2011, accepting the guilt and undertaking that only waitresses with proper employment agreements would be allowed, and that obscene gestures and close physical contact would be prohibited. Despite this, the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai, cancelled both licenses by order dated 30 June 2011, and the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner then approached the Bombay High Court by way of a writ petition. The court heard arguments from both sides. The petitioner's counsel argued that the cancellation was disproportionate and that the petitioner had admitted the mistake and assured compliance. The state's counsel supported the cancellation. The court held that while the violation was serious, the cancellation was too harsh given the petitioner's acceptance of guilt and assurance of future compliance. The court set aside the impugned orders and directed the restoration of the licenses, subject to the condition that the petitioner strictly complies with all terms and conditions and does not repeat the violation. The court also directed the petitioner to pay costs of Rs. 5,000 to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority.
Headnote
A) Licensing Law - Cancellation of License - Proportionality - Sections 33(w), 33(y), 33(xa) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - The Licensing Authority cancelled the petitioner's eating house and public entertainment licenses based on a police report of obscene gestures by waitresses. The petitioner admitted the guilt and assured future compliance. The court held that cancellation was disproportionate and that the authority should have considered the nature of violation and the licensee's response. The court restored the licenses subject to conditions. (Paras 1-8) B) Licensing Law - Show Cause Notice - Mitigating Factors - Sections 33(w), 33(y), 33(xa) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - The petitioner's reply to the show cause notice accepted the guilt and promised to ensure no repetition. The court held that such acceptance and assurance are relevant mitigating factors that should be considered before imposing the extreme penalty of cancellation. (Paras 4-6) C) Licensing Law - Discretion of Licensing Authority - Judicial Review - Sections 33(w), 33(y), 33(xa) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - The court found that the Licensing Authority did not properly exercise its discretion and imposed a disproportionate penalty. The court set aside the cancellation and directed restoration of licenses, emphasizing that the authority must act judiciously. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cancellation of eating house license and public entertainment license under the Bombay Police Act, 1951 was justified and proportionate to the alleged violation of obscene gestures by waitresses.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned orders dated 30 June 2011 and the appellate order, and directed the restoration of the licenses. The petitioner was directed to pay costs of Rs. 5,000 to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority.
Law Points
- Cancellation of license must be proportionate to the gravity of violation
- Licensing Authority must consider the nature of violation and the licensee's response
- Acceptance of guilt and assurance of future compliance can be mitigating factors
- Power to cancel license under Bombay Police Act
- 1951 must be exercised judiciously
