Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Unlock Premises and Comply with Safety Measures: Karnataka High Court Orders in Firecracker Sale Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling by the Karnataka High Court, the Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj ordered the unlocking of premises and strict compliance with safety measures for the sale of firecrackers in Bengaluru.

The court was hearing a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by firecracker sellers, who faced hurdles in conducting their business due to their premises being locked by authorities. The petitioners, represented by senior counsel Sri. Satish M. Doddamani and advocate Sri. Sagar B.B., argued that despite holding a valid license, their business operations were unjustly hampered.

In his order, Justice Govindaraj emphasized the need for adherence to safety standards, stating, “The petitioners in this petition shall conduct their respective businesses strictly in consonance with the observations made in the inspection report dated 8.11.2023.” This directive came after the Deputy Solicitor General of India, Sri. Shanthi Bhushan, presented an inspection report indicating non-compliance by the petitioners.

Further, the court mandated that any deviations from the safety observations or failure to implement necessary corrective measures would expose the petitioners to the risk of suspension of their business. The Deputy Commissioner was instructed to inspect and take action based on compliance by the petitioners.

Highlighting the need for thorough license verification, the court also ordered that in future, the Deputy Commissioner should sign or e-sign every page of the license. In cases of disputed licenses, forensic verification was directed, with the Chief Secretary instructed to initiate disciplinary action in cases of unauthorized signatures.

The ruling also referenced the precedent set in the case of M/s Cracker Bazaar vs Commissioner of Police and others, guiding the current decision-making process.

This judgement is seen as a crucial step in balancing the rights of businesses to operate within legal frameworks while ensuring public safety and adherence to regulatory standards. The court’s decision to dispose of the writ petition with specific directions underscores its commitment to upholding legal procedures and safety norms in commercial activities.

With specific directions underscores its commitment to upholding legal procedures and safety norms in commercial activities.

Date of Decision: 10 November, 2023

SMT. SWETHA .M VS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Latest Legal News