Madras High CourtCONT P/1746/2018dismissed

Qlounge v. Karthikeyan, Ias

2019-07-03Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.07.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA Contempt Petition No.1746 of 2018 QLOUNGE represented by its Proprietor S.Lathifa Banu No.127B, NS Complex 3rd Floor Purasaiwalkam Next to Lumbine Square Apartment & Old Megala Theatre Chennai 600 007 ..

Petitioner -vs1. Karthikeyan, I.A.S., The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Ripon Buildings Chennai 600 003

2. A.K.Vishwanathan Commissioner of Police Vepery, Chennai 600 007

3. Rajendran Dy.Commissioner of Police Kilpauk Range Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010

4. Surajudeen Asst.Commissioner of Police G5, Secretariat Colony Police Station 26/61, Barkha Road Nammalwarpet, A.K.Swamy Nagar Purasaiwakkam, Chennai 600 012

5. Rajeswari Inspector of Police G5, Secretariat Colony Police Station 26/61, Barkha Road Nammalwarpet, A.K.Swamy Nagar Purasaiwakkam, Chennai 600 012

6. Veerakumar Inspector of Police G1, Vepery Police Station 2, Jeremiah Road, Vepery Chennai 600 007 (Respondents 3 to 6 impleaded as per order dated 13.6.2019 in Sub Apln.No.498 of 2018) ..

Respondents Petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 9.4.2018 made in W.P.No.7909 of 2018.

For Petitioner ::

Mr.M.Purushothaman For Respondents ::

Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

When the matter was taken up, Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, referring to the liberty granted by this Court to the respondents to visit the restaurant in question for violation of the rules, stated that only on the basis of the complaint received by the respondent police alleging that by taking advantage of the order passed by this Court, the writ petitioner-restaurant was selling hookah items, a team was formed headed by the fifth respondent/Inspector of Police and they have also visited the restaurant in

question and recovered the banned hookah items. She has also produced the copy of photograph in this regard.

2. A perusal of the same also clearly shows that the petitioner, after getting orders from this Court, has started selling the banned hookah items. As the respondents have acted only on the basis of the liberty granted by this Court and they have also registered a First Information Report in this regard, this Court is not inclined to proceed with the contempt proceedings, as there is no violation of the Court's order. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands dismissed.

SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) ss //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2019. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

Mv/18/07/2019