Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. A perusal of the counter filed by the respondents and also the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) revealed that as directed by this Court in W.P.No.31498 of 2024, the petitioner was issued show cause notice dated 27.11.2024 on the basis of enquiry report submitted by the third respondent alleging that the obscene dance programmes were being conducted by the petitioner.

“ .....4. As per the direction of Hon'ble High Court Madras, the jurisdiction police officers had conducted a discreet enquiry and submit enquiry report as follows:

'' The obscene Dance Programmes was being conducted by the petitioner were in intoxicated state, the female dancers are subjected to physical and sexual abuse and also the female dancer leaving after the dance show during late hours, they were being crowded by persons leaving Resto Bars, in drunken mood. The Vehicles of the persons attending dance programmes are parked in the road side without order and are scattered everywhere, which is causing severe disturbance to the public in the locality. The above dance club used speakers for playing music in the dance programmes were playing in volumes much above the permitted limit, which causes severe disturbance to the people of the nearby locality and many complaints were being https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/05/2025 03:59:39 pm ) received by the Beat Officer and the police Station. The activities of the dance club is disturbing the public tranquility and creates the law and order issue. As such the filed officer have requested the Public Resort License issued to the ''Hotel Platinum Stars”.....

9. Further, the respondents also produced photographs to show that in and around the petitioner's premises, there are dumping of wastages. The petitioner's premises is located in the ground floor. It is being run with the small board a Hotel Platinum Stars is not running any https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/05/2025 03:59:39 pm ) boarding and lodging in the hotel premises. The petitioner is conducting only dance programmes. It is not for the hotel customers. They are running the show from 06.45 P.M. to 08.15 P.M. and 08.30 P.M., to 10.30 P.M. Therefore, it is conclusively for dance programmes only and not for boarding and lodging purpose. The petitioner is also not running any restaurant. It clearly shows that the petitioner is running dance programme for specific immoral purpose and for specific customers. During discreet enquiry, the third respondent found that the petitioner is running the Dance Programme with female dancers who are crowded by intoxicated persons while leaving the venue after the dance show during late hours. The Vehicles of the persons attending the dance programme are parked on the road side without order and are scattered everywhere, which is causing severe disturbance to the public people in that locality. The above dance club uses speakers for playing music in the dance programme and the volume is much above the permitted limit, which causes severe disturbance to the people of the nearby locality and many complaints were being received by the Beat Officer and the police Station.

10. That apart in the guise of cultural dance programme, the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/05/2025 03:59:39 pm ) dancers are made to wear revealing clothing and are also made to dance in an obscene manner. Further the Counsel for the Petitioner himself in his arguments, submitted that the premises neither provide the service of restaurant/eat house nor the service of accommodation which proves that the Petitioner’s premise does not even come under the definition of “Hotel” and the premises is being run solely for immoral purposes. These are clear violations of license conditions and as such the petitioner was rightly issued show cause notice as contemplated under Section 76(1) of Madras City Police Act, 1988. Therefore, the first respondent has rightly cancelled the license due to the petitioner. In view of the cancellation, renewal of license does not arise, and as such,the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of license was also rejected. This Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the first respondent and the writ petition is devoid of merits and the impugned order is not liable to be quashed.