Synopsis

The petitioner, running a restaurant and bar with a performance licence, faced cancellation of his licence after two raids conducted in February and June 2024. The Competent Authority alleged violations of the Public Amusement Rules, 1960 and licence conditions, including alteration of stage size, indecent dance performances, and presence of more singers than permitted. The Authority also noted 12 past crimes registered against the establishment and two previous suspensions. The petitioner’s show‑cause reply was rejected, and the licence was cancelled. The Appellate Authority affirmed the cancellation. The Bombay High Court quashed both orders, holding that: (i) the Competent Authority did not consider the underlying material (inspection reports and panchnamas) before forming its satisfaction; (ii) the Appellate Authority merely reproduced the show‑cause notice without independent application of mind; and (iii) mere pendency of criminal cases, without proof of conviction, cannot be a ground for cancellation of a licence. The licence was restored.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Coram: Justice N. J. Jamadar

Date of Judgment: 16th April 2026

Citation: Writ Petition No. 3680 of 2026 (2026:BHC-AS:18568)

Core Law: Rules of Licensing and Controlling place of Public Amusement (other than Cinemas) and Performances for Public Amusement including Melas and Tamashas, 1960 – Rules 109, 102, 122-B, 124, 219, 232, 233, 238; Principles of natural justice.

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Rules of Licensing and Controlling place of Public Amusement (other than Cinemas) and Performances for Public Amusement including Melas and Tamashas, 1960 – Rule 238 (power to suspend or cancel licence), Rules 102, 122-B, 124, 219, 232, 233 (various conditions for performance licences)

• Principles of natural justice – audi alteram partem; requirement of placing relevant material before the authority

Key legal principles applied

• Cancellation of licence requires objective material: The Licensing Authority must arrive at a satisfaction that there has been a contravention of Rules or conditions of licence on the basis of relevant underlying material (e.g., inspection reports, panchnamas). Mere reference to “reports” without placing the actual documents is insufficient.

• Appellate Authority must independently apply its mind: The Appellate Authority cannot mechanically affirm the order of the Competent Authority. It must evaluate the legality, propriety and corre

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.