1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.80/1995 1 Shyam Sharma s/o R.S. Sharma, General Manager, Marketing, B.D.A. Limited, Chhabria Marketing, 12 Evergreen Industrial Estate, Off. Shakti Mills Compound, Mahalaxmi, Bombay-400 011. 2 Kishore s/o Bhagchand Lassi, Salesman BDA Limited, Chhabria Marketing Ltd., 12 Evergreen Industrial Estate, Off. Shakti Mills Compound, Mahalaxmi, Bombay - 400 011. ...Petitioners. Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad Dist. Aurangabad. 2 Vijaykumar Sabarwal, Age : 49 years, Vice President, Madhu Industrial Estate, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Lower Parel, Shaw Wallace Co., Bombay0400 013. 3 Raju Pyarekisan Puri, Age : 32 years, Salesman, Shaw Wallace Co. Ha. Mu. Zambad Estate, Srusti Vihar, New Shreyas Nagar, Aurangabad. 4 Samindra Roy, J.K. Rey Age : 36 years, Shaw Wallace Company, Liquor Division, 4, Bankshall Street, Calcutta. 5 Nirvik Guha Sujitkumar Guha, Age : 30 years, Marketing Services Manager, Shaw Wallace Company, Liquor Division, 4 Bankshall Street, Calcutta. 6 Sunil Wankhade, Sales Manager, Shaw Wallace Co., Pandurang Budhkar Marg, 2 Lower Parel, Bombay-400 013. 7 Raj Harish Otake, Area Manager, Madhu Industrial Estate, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Lower Parel, Bombay-400 013. ...Respondents. Shri B.B. Yenge Advocate for appellants. Shri S.G. Nandedkar,A.P.P. for respondents no.1. Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Advocate for respondents No.2, 3 and 6. WRIT PETITION NO.81/1995 1 Pradipkumar K. Chatterjee, General Sales Manager, BDA Limited, Chhabria Marketing Ltd., 12, Evergreen Industrial Estate, Shakti Mills Lane, Mahalaxmi, Bombay-400 011. 2 Nandkumar Shivdayal Chhabria, Age : 53 years, Authorised signatory BDA Limited, 19th floor, B, Blocks Bhangala Layout, Bangalore-34. 3 Shyam Sharma s/o R.S. Sharma, General Manager, Marketing, B.D.A. Limited, Chhabria Marketing, 12 Evergreen Industrial Estate, Off. Haines road, Shakti Mills Lane, Mahalaxmi, Bombay-400 011. 4 Kishore s/o Bhagchand Lassi, Salesman BDA Limited, Chhabria Marketing Ltd., 12 Evergreen Industrial Estate, Off. Shakti Mills Compound, Mahalaxmi, Bombay-400 011. ...Petitioners. Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad. 2 Sharmila w/o Ashishkumar Chatterjee, Age : 28 years. 3 Ashishkumar s/o Aamitkumar Chatterjee, Aged :33 years, Both residing at ...Respondents. 3 Pushpanagari, Plot No.3, Aurangabad. Mr. B.B. Yenge, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for respondent No.1/State. WRIT PETITION NO.82/1995 1 Vijaykumar Sabarwal, Age : 42 years, Occu. Service, Madhu Industrial Estate, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Lower Parel, Bombay0400 013. 2 Samindra Roy, J.K. Rey Age : 36 years, R/o Shaw Wallace & Company,Liquor Division, 4 Bankshall Street, Calcutta-1. 3 Nirvik Guha Sujitkumar Guha, Age : 30 years, Occu.Marketing Services, Manager, Shaw Wallace Company,Liquor Division, 4 Bankshall Street, Calcutta. 4 Sunil Vasantrao Wankhade, Age : 32 years, Occu. Sales Manager, 4 C Vijay Apartments, Near Labour Court, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440 001. 5 Raj Harsh Orke, Area Manager, Seagram Manufacturing P. Ltd., 101/102, A.N. Chambers, Turner Road, Bandra (West), Bombay – 400 050 ...Petitioners. Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Government Pleader, High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. 2 The Police Inspector, Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad. ..Respondents. Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. S.H. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for respondents. 4 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITON NO. 68/1995 Rajiv Pyare Krishan Puri, Aged : 33 years, Occu. Service, R/o 5B, Sriti Vihar, Shrayanagar, Aurangabad. ...Petitioner. Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Government Pleader, High Court, Bench at Auranabad. 2 The Police Inspector, Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad Dist. Aurangabad. ...Respondents. Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Advocate for applicant. Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for respondents. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. Date : 01st October, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT:- 1 All these writ petitions can be disposed of by this common judgment and order. The petitioners are either officers, employees or Directors of a Companies by name B.D.A. Ltd. and Shaw Wallace Company Ltd. . The police of Kranti Chowk Police Station registered an offence under Section 23 and 24 read with Section 73 and 74 of Bombay Prohibition Act on 07/06/1994 against all the petitioners. The complainant asserted in his complaint that the petitioners' companies manufactured 'India made Foreign liquor'. They through the petitioners had displayed hoardings in Aurangabad city in such a fashion that they solicited use of consumption of their product a Whiskey by name “Director’s Special” “Royal challenge” and “Officers 5 Choice”. On the basis of the complaint, the police ultimately filed a charge sheet against the petitioners before the criminal Court. 2 The petitioners have filed these writ petitions for getting quashed the registration of the crime as well for getting quashed the criminal case initiated on the basis of such complaint. Th question is whether the petitioners have contravened the provisions of Sections 23 and 24 of the Bombay Prohibition Act? In order to answer this question one has to first read the provisions to find out their ingredients Sections 23 and 24 reads as under.. 23. No person shall- (a) solicit the use of, or offer any intoxicant or hemp; or of soliciting use of Intoxicant or (c) do any act which is calculated to incite or encourage any member of the public or a class of individuals or the public generally to commit any offence under this Act or to commit a breach of any rule, regulation or order made thereunder or the conditions of any licence, permit, pass or authorization granted thereunder. Section 24:-No person shall print or publish in any newspaper, news-sheet, book, leaflet, booklet or any other single or periodical publication or otherwise display or distribute any advertisement or other mater - (a) which solicits the use of or offers any intoxicant or hemp; (b) which is calculated to encourage or incite any individual, class of individuals or the public generally to commit an offence under this Act, or to commit a breach of or to evade the provisions of any rule, regulation or orders made thereunder or the conditions of any licnece, permit, pass or authorization granted, thereunder. (2) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (3), nothing in this section shall apply to- 6 (a) catalog or price lists which may be generally or specially approved by the (Commissioner) in this behalf; (b) any advertisement or other matter contained in any newspaper, news sheet, book, leaflet, booklet or other publication printed and published outside the (State); (c) any advertisement or other matter contained in any newspaper printed, and published in the State before such date as the State Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, specify; and (d) any other advertisement or matter which the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, generally or specially exempt from the operation of this section. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit within the State the circulation, distribution or sale of any news paper, news -sheet, book, leaflet, booklet or other publication printed and published outside the State which contains any advertisement or matter- (a) which solicits the use of or offers any intoxicant or helm; or (b) which is calculated to encourage or incite any individual or class of individuals or the public generally to commit any offence under this Act or to commit an breach of or to evade the provisions of any rule, regulation or order made thereunder, or the conditions of any licence, permit, pass or authorization granted thereunder. 3 Admittedly the petitioners have displayed certain hoardings all over Aurangabad City. The question is (i) whether the hoardings amounted to solicitation for use of their products namely Whiskeys and (ii) whether the act amounted to encouragement to members of public to commit an offence under this Act? 4 On perusal of the copies of the hoardings which are annexed to the paper book, I found that in none of the hoardings word whiskey 7 or liquor is used, in none of the hoardings, picture of whiskey bottle is displayed. Among other things on the hoardings words “Director’s Special”, “Officers choice” and “Royal challenge” are mentioned. In one of the hoardings, a caricature of a famous test cricket player is shown for congratulating him for his achievements. In second hoardings, the Company Shaw Wallace declared that they were official sponsors of certain cricket series. Third hoarding displays a pack of cards by name Director’s Special. The fourth hoarding mentions names Royal challenge as brand name of silver bar accessories. The 5th hoarding shows name: “officer’s choice Aqua Pura”; possibly an advertisement of packaged water. The 6th Hoarding depicted a picture of young woman, again depicting name of “officer’s choice Aqua Pura”; possibly an advertisement of packaged water. 5 If one does not know that Royal challenge, Officer’s choice and Director’s Special are brand names of certain whiskeys, one would not know that the petitioners are trying to advertise the Whiskeys of said brands. Admittedly, these brands are used also for selling other products of the Companies. The complainant in his complaint, it seems assumed that the names mentioned above are brand names of whiskeys (manufactured by the petitioners' Companies). The complaint based on such assumption is apparently misleading. The police should not have taken cognizance of such a complaint. No offence under Sections 23 or 24 is committed for displaying the above mentioned hoardings. All the petitions should therefore succeed. ORDER a) The petition Nos.68/1995, 82/1995 are allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). 8 b) The petition Nos.80/1995, 81/1995 are allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) to the extent of quashing and set aside the F.I.R. and charge sheet. [A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] ts k/ok