
HC seeks police's reply on plea against pubs, bars running illegally without proper liquor licence
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notices to the Delhi government and the city police and asked them to file their responses containing details of such bars, pubs and restaurants.
"The affidavit by the respondents should also contain the details of action taken in case the bars, pubs and restaurants mentioned in the petition are found violating the provisions of law," the bench said.
The court has listed the matter for further hearing on August 27.
Petitioner Mahtab Khan has claimed that several restaurants, clubs, pubs and bars in the city are operating illegally, without the L-16 licence, causing loss to the government.
Senior advocate Kirti Uppal and lawyer Sitab Ali Chaudhary, representing the petitioner, submitted that despite pointing out the illegality through a representation, the authorities have failed to take any action and stop these establishments from operating after the permitted time limit.
The plea has pointed out that under the Delhi Excise Act and Rules, standalone bars, restaurants, clubs and pubs are prohibited from operating and selling alcohol after 1 am unless they possess the L-16 licence.
Despite this, numerous establishments have been found to be serving alcohol well past the permitted hours, sometimes operating until 7 am, in blatant disregard for the law, it has alleged.
"In recent weeks, the petitioner sent some persons to visit the establishments listed in the petition, all of which have been found to operate past the legally permitted time and sell alcohol without the required licences.
"The list is only inclusive and not exhaustive, as mentioned in the petition, indicating 21 such bars, pubs, clubs and restaurants, that is, violators. Such places organise events and parties each night which go on till 7 am without the requisite licence and permit," the plea has claimed.
It has said that these establishments are located in such areas where fire tenders cannot even reach in case of an accident as some of those do not have an appropriate approach to the road.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Porsche crash case: Accused gets 3-day temporary bail after father's death on August 1
The Bombay High Court has granted three-day temporary bail to an accused in the Pune Porsche car crash case on account of his father's death . Aditya Avinash Sood was granted bail from August 2 to 5 by Justice Ashwin Bhobe on Friday. The case dates back to May 19 last year when a speeding Porsche car, allegedly driven by an inberiated minor driver, ran over two motorcycle-borne IT professionals in Pune's Kalyaninagar area. Aditya Sood was among the 10 arrested in connection with the swapping of blood samples to nullify alcohol tests of the juvenile driver . As per police, Aditya Sood's blood samples were replaced with that of his father. Among those arrested are doctors and staff of Sassoon General Hospital in Pune who allegedly played an active role in the blood swapping process. Live Events Advocate Abid Mulani, representing Aditya Sood, on Friday moved a 'praecipe' before the court seeking interim bail for his client for three days so that he could attend the funerary rituals of his father. Mulani told court Sood's father had suffered a heart attack on July 27 and died in a hospital on August 1. Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray told court the prosecution has no objection if bail was granted to Sood. The HC then granted bail to Sood on PR bond of Rs 25,000.


New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
HC upholds charges against suspended Delhi govt official Khakha
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has reportedly refused to quash the charges framed against suspended Delhi government official Premoday Khakha, who allegedly raped a minor girl several times. The High Court also upheld the charges of causing the minor girl's miscarriage and the disappearance of evidence framed against the official's wife, Seema Rani. It further refused to set aside the charge against his two children and wife under Section 21 of the POCSO Act for failure to report the offence despite having knowledge. 'This court is of the considered opinion that there is no perversity or legal infirmity in the order passed by the sessions court framing charges against petitioner Premoday Khakha for offences under Sections 376(2)(f), 376(3), 323, and 354 of the IPC, and Sections 6 and 8 of the POCSO Act,' Justice Swarana Kana Sharma said in the judgment passed on July 15 and made available on July 28.


United News of India
6 hours ago
- United News of India
Delhi HC upholds conviction of three Delhi Police personnel in 2013 sexual harassment case
New Delhi, Aug 2 (UNI) The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of three Delhi Police personnel in a 2013 sexual harassment case including a woman and her minor niece, directing the convicts to surrender before the trial court within five days. The Court ruled that no leniency will be granted given the nature of the offence and the fact that the convicts were law enforcement officers who violated the very law they were meant to uphold. The three convicts, Jaidev, Jagmal, and Suraj Bhan alias Monu were found guilty under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The Court noted that the incident occurred in May 2013 and involved repeated misconduct by the convicts, who were also neighbours of the complainant. The High Court observed that the convicts, despite being public servants, had persistently engaged in inappropriate behaviour, including making vulgar gestures, sexually explicit remarks, and, in one instance, indecent exposure in the presence of the complainant and her niece. The Court rejected claims for leniency based on the age, health conditions, or family responsibilities, citing the seriousness of the offences and their prolonged nature. The judgment showcased that the case did not merit a rehabilitative approach due to the aggravating circumstances, including the convicts' positions in the police force and the repeated nature of the acts. The Court further noted that other FIRs had been registered by the complainant in subsequent years, indicating ongoing harassment and misconduct. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the High Court highlighted that sentencing must be proportionate to the gravity of the crime and serve as a deterrent, especially when the perpetrators hold positions of authority. The Court concluded that a punitive approach was necessary to restore public confidence in the justice system. All sentences will run concurrently, and the High Court directed that its order be sent to the trial court to ensure compliance. UNI ATK PPP AAB