Karnataka High Court Dismisses ‘Half-Baked’ PIL To Revoke License Of Bar Allegedly In Close Proximity To ‘Idgah’

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking to quash the license issued to a Bar and Restaurant which was allegedly within 100 meters distance of an ‘Idgah,’a place for Muslim worship, in Hussainpura Village in Tumkur district.

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by residents of the said village.

It said “considering all the factual aspects of nature which emerged from the perusal of material on record that is petition and annexures. We are of the clear opinion that petitioners are approaching this court only on their assumptions and presumptions and in a haphazard manner. This court cannot entertain such half-baked petitions under the guise of public interest litigation. As such PIl is dismissed at threshold.”

The petitioner's counsel argued that Respondent no.8, who is running an entity under caption Annapurna Bar and Restaurant, is a licensed liquor shop but it was argued that the party is by committing breach of regulations. Further, on receipt of representation submitted by petitioner there was some movement by the authorities of the state as well as village panchayat,and as per prayer of the petitioners, the state authorities were desirous of shifting the licenced premises from one place to another. Petitioners opposed such ‘so-called shifting’ as well.

In negating the petitioner’s submissions, the bench noted “very interestingly for all these submissions the basis is only assumptions and presumptions of the petitioners. In so far as the first rider submitted by the petitioners that the licensed premises is within the distance of 100 meters from a religious place namely Idgah, there is absolutely no material placed on record in the form of any survey conducted by any authorised department or agency.”

Further it said “secondly there is no material coming forth to show that the issue of shifting was considered at the level of some competent authority and that competent authority recorded its opinion for shifting of the licence.”

Finally, the Bench opined that none of the petitioners was following Muslim religion as per the Title clause of the petition.

“Copy of the representation shows that none of the representatives is also following Muslim religion so as to raise any grievance of that nature,” it concluded.

Accordingly it dismissed the petition at threshold.

Case Title: Balaji & Others And State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 25270 of 2023

Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 444