KJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.930 OF 2008 Shaikh Mohd.Shabbir ) owner of and proprietor of ) International Cinema Theater ) Parlour, Bashir Chawl, Dharavi, ) Main Road, Plot No.337, Opp. ) Dharavi Restaurant, Dharavi, ) Mumbai-400 017. )..Petitioner V/s. 1. State of Maharashtra ) Home Department, Mantralaya ) Mumbai, (Maharashtra) ) 2. Commissioner of Police, ) Greater Mumbai, (Maharashtra) ) H.O.: Police Head Quarters, ) Opp.Crawford Market, Mahatma ) Phule Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400001) 3. Authority of Licence, HQ No.1, ) Addl.Dy.Commissioners of ) Police, Maharashtra, H.O : ) Police Head Quarters, Opp. ) Crawford Market, Mahatma Phule ) Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001. ) 4. The Commissioner of Police ) (Maharashtra) (Theater Branch) ) H.O.: Police Head Quarters, ) Opp.Crawford Market, Mahatma ) Phule Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400001) 5. Sr.Inspector of Police, Dharavi) Police Station, 90 Feet Road ) Dharavi, Mumbai-400 017 )..Respondents ---- Petitioner in person. Mr.Niranjan Pandit AGP for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 18.11.2008. Judgment :- ( Per : R.S.Mohite,J) : 2 : 1. Rule. By consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith and both parties are heard. By this writ petition the petitioner Shaikh Mohd.Shabbir impugns an order dated 24.3.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police/respondent no.3 H.Q.No.1 under "The Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953. By the impugned judgment and order a licence bearing license no.46/2001 granted in favour of M/s.International Video Theatre, situated at Bashir chawl, Dharavi Main Road, Plot No.337, Opp. Dharavi Restaurant, Dharavi, Mumbai-400 017, is directed to be cancelled from the date of the receipt of the order. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows :- (a) That on 10.8.2001 respondent no.4 i.e. The Commissioner of Police, Maharashtra (Theatre) branch granted a licence bearing no.46/2001 to the petitioner who was conducting the business of a video cinema house in the name and style as "M/s.International Video Cinema". The licence was granted to the petitioner subject to several conditions which were specified in the licence. Condition no.15 specified that in violation of the provisions of the Bombay Cinema (Regulation) Act 1953 and the Maharashtra Cinema (Regulation) : 3 : (Amendment) Rules 1987 and the conditions as detailed on the reverse side of the licence, the same would be liable for suspension or cancellation. The licence was initially valid till 31.12.2001 but was thereafter renewed from time to time. (b) The record indicates that on 7.2.2008 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner alleging several violations. The show cause notice stated that on 5.2.2008, the premises where the video cinema was being shown was got inspected through the local police station and it was found that a cinema by name "Aksar" was being exhibited. It was found by the police that posters of other movies by name Arjun, Deva and Agnipath were however displayed but there was no poster in respect of the picture "Aksar" which was currently being shown. It was contended that though action had been taken in the past against the cinema theatre, some attractive and bright posters had been put in order to attract school going children. It was alleged that as per the rules, the requisite toilet as well as a first aid box were not found in the premises. A load bearing loft was found inside the premises and this constituted a risk to the viewers. It was also found that two persons were holding a ticket bearing the same number. The petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why his video licence should not be : 4 : cancelled. (c) The petitioner filed a reply on 10.3.2008 contending that he had filed a writ petition bearing Writ Petition (L) No.1151 of 2007 in the High Court and therefore, the show cause notice should not be proceeded with. He contended that the police had visited the premises without permission of the Court or their senior officers. He challenged the authority of the officer who had issued the show cause notice and contended that since 1987 he was being harassed by the Dharavi police station because he has refused to pay them any gratification. He contended that he had not violated any rules. (d) On considering the material and the reply, by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.3.2008, respondent no.3, cancelled the licence of the petitioner as aforesaid and this has compelled the petitioner to file the present petition in this Court. 3. Heard both sides and perused the record. In our view, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside on one ground alone. A reading of the order impugned indicates that the same is passed upon a police inspection conducted by the local police station on 5.2.2008. It is clear that the : 5 : officer who has issued the show cause notice relied upon a police report. In fact, a copy of the police report and a panchanama dated 5.2.2008 were shown to us in this proceeding. The police report and the panchanama were therefore, vital documents which formed the basis of the further action taken against the petitioner. It was fairly conceded that the police report and the panchanama dated 5.2.2008 were never furnished to the petitioner alongwith the show cause notice and therefore, in our view, he had no opportunity to deal with the same. We find that these are documents that went to the root of the matter and therefore, fairness and principles of natural justice require that these documents ought to have been furnished to the petitioner alongwith the show cause notice before any further action was taken against him. 5. In the circumstances, petition will have to be allowed and stands allowed in terms of prayer clause-(a). It is however, made clear that the respondent will be at liberty to take action in accordance with law by issuing a fresh show cause notice together with all documents which form the basis on which they relied upon including the police report, panchanama dated 5.2.2008 and statements if any, recorded and dispose off the matter afresh after hearing the petitioner, if they so desire. : 6 : Rule made absolute accordingly. Writ petition stands disposed off. Rule made absolute accordingly. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)