High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Jubilee Recreational … vs Commissioner Of Police on 10 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S Jubilee Recreational … vs Commissioner Of Police on 10 September, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNRTAKA, BANGALOREEOIj§'v

DATED THIS EETIOW DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2OQ9fE"

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN SEANTRNACOOOAR "

WRIT PETITION NO.17417/2OOS(GMéROEICE)V

BETWEEN

M/S JUBILEE RECREETIONRE~ASSOCIATION
NO 44, 4TE_CROSS;_ESENATNNRSRR,
BANGALORE §60;O§4′ 4’Tg *.. =_~
RERRESENTED’BY’T$S_RRESIOENTwHfi

MR OANCRORAR»E_ V; RETITIONER
(By M/S IAN ASSOCIETES;.SRI L.K. SRINIVASA
‘ ‘v&ERIHY;.AfiV )

COMMISSIONER OE POLICE
‘«EANGAEORE CITY
‘INFANTRY ROAD
EANOEEORE

,M

2 “DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
C»_ NORTH DIVISION
IrBANGREORE

3 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
J C NAGAR SUB DIVIISON
BANGALORE

x
E
3
§
S
K
E
3
E
is
3
§
§
3
4
2
3
2
§
E
i
2
§
§
In
3
§
3
§
;

2

E
;

§
S
5
2
§
5
§
3
3
3
E
5
E
5

4 $32 S?§TIQfi Hausa QEEICER
aayaaxxaean ?9LI$E 5T$$IQN _ . =v ,-
3A§9ALaa£ ..3 RES?Qfi$E§T$* _A

{By gr: : 3 3 vzswgxgxa, Qcéé. 3

$313 we 5:533 GREEK AgI;cLfi§»z2§ AND 22?
33 THE CQNSTEUT:§g~0E;zg§:agéKgYzxe we grass?
THE RESFQRDENTS N§?L7fi§ .:gsxs: UPGN $33
PETITIGHEE_?§,QE§§i$ §IQE§$EV?$%:PLAYING GAMES
my sK:L;s3Lfi%E~¢$§E§Mg fififiéé; caays {RHHMY}
rasna iagfifg, :§afi$£gf”£3$&bH$ svnxc, JOKER
5a§v§}”3Ri3§fi} ¢$£$EaE ¢E:cxz3, ETC.; EITHER
sfimER,?$E’$%fi§§$$Eg §0::c§ Aflf GR UNEER THE
L:cENs:a§*gxb_¢é§?$$QL&:NG 9? ELA$ES as Qvsnzc
Am§5zM3N§’a3§g§. V

IS SQMING 62%?’ ESE SRBEES ‘EH13

¥,ég2;Lis$ ¢a$ar mans THE FQLLQ%IN§:

£3 R,i} E Efi

“V_ ‘Learn5& Gavexmment ?leaéex is dizected ts

“% : {aka natiae an hehaif mf Ehg xespanenta.

2. 1% this writ ggtitiaa, the gatitienar baa

ssught £9: a diififitififi éizecting the

‘F/Z3

M”°&4#”‘1~°”W 3 Miran a m..aw:um.r:zvwrm x<ua…m.u

§
2
as
%
E
E
§&e
§
ism
Q
x
§
:3
E
§
:

2::

g
§
§
$
§
E
3
E
3
§
E
E
.5
2
§
§
§
%
.3

iawful activities of the petitian9fly§nflyfiha§

wsuld taka actinn cniy gf tbs” §etiti¢ner”

indulges in any uniawffil ,a£§i%ifié3{ fl_’3$

fuxther aubmits that €h3_:$$§én§en§$gwi;l3nm$_’

inaiat th§ getitianer féh liaan§a_far finch cf
the activities fi@r fwhi&hf,fi3> licenae £3
zequired. _ _w»’%

The–~..Vs7a1?;«d a22.}:§::é.iafs’ic>z;};a 3.593: glaced on

raaa$d.__AL

5. g*Z_h&%a ¢a£efiully cansiéerefi tha argumentg

V,’

V”maQ2 fig figa iearnad caunaai fer the paztiaa

the mats-zialg piaaeé on recmta.

Tfifi ¢filg5s§mplaint sf the §atiti§ner is that

“th@ ‘:$spand$nts ara intérfgrimg wit& the
‘uiawful aativities aarriéd an by them. Learfisd

‘H=.-$avexnment Eleadez baa éenieé the aaid

ailagatians mafia in tha writ petition, Having

zegazd tfi thg fasta and aixaamstanmea ofi the

[V5

%¥”i?6\’°”§.”””% mmam ‘§a’.$;.li’».3$%o…kl°-Au Mm. nm..’..’ .V’CIr- W ….

any appropriate action according to” 7.
law, if the petitioner indulges ainf,*

any unlawful activity.Mm

accordingly. No oosts;w_7o

Learned CkNernmentӣfleadef}ni$ permitted

to file his nemo flf appearanoe’fidihin. eight

weeks iron tooay, “{pU’

Sd/«-

IUDQ

‘£
3
O
U
3
Q
I
§
E
E
5:.

0
32

2’3
0
U
I
Q
13
3
“-2
5
§
IL
0
E
:3
O
U
I
9
I
2
E
E
LI.

0

‘:2
D
O
U

3.’.

9

I
S
S
5
Z
5
gr»
E ,,
3
3
J
E
2
E
E
E
E
E
E
5
E
3

The writ petition UaisU diaposed;Up§fn