Telangana High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Licensed Hookah Lounge Operators, Calls Police Action Abuse Of Process

The Telangana High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against the operators of a hookah lounge booked for alleged offences under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 20(2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COTPA).

Justice Tirumala Devi Eada, while holding that the allegations in the complaint did not disclose a violation of the statutory provisions, allowed a criminal petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking the quashing of proceedings in a crime registered by the Narsingi Police Station, Ranga Reddy District.

The petitioners were running a cafe, within which a hookah lounge was being operated. On 26.07.2025, the police visited the premises, seized certain materials used for consuming hookah and registered the above crime, alleging commission of offences under Section 223 BNS and Section 20(2) of COTPA.

The allegation, as reflected in the complaint, was that the petitioners were running a hookah centre without obtaining valid permission from the concerned authorities.

Assailing the registration of the FIR, the petitioners contended that they had obtained a New Trade Licence from the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) on 21.05.2025 to sell tobacco products and had also secured a licence from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), valid from 11.04.2025 to 10.04.2026.

They further submitted that on 09.06.2025, they had applied to the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, seeking a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to operate the hookah lounge. Following a lack of communication from the Commissionerate, a reminder was subsequently sent. However, instead of responding to the representation, the police conducted the visit and registered the case.

The Court, while hearing the case, examined Section 20(2) of COTPA, which penalises the sale or distribution of cigarettes or tobacco products that do not contain the specified warnings and the nicotine and tar content on the package or label.

Further, with respect to Section 223 BNS, the Court observed that to attract the provision, there must be a promulgation by a public servant lawfully empowered and a disobedience of such promulgation. The petitioners' contention was that they had not violated any such promulgation.

“It is not the case of the Police that the petitioners have violated the said warning. The Police could have acted upon the representation submitted by the petitioners and examined whether the said Abundance Café conforms to standardized operations or not. Instead of doing so, they have resorted to registering an FIR, which is improper”, the Court observed in this regard.

In its reasoning, the Court referred to the decision in Chidurala Shyamsunder v. State of Telangana, wherein it was observed that the act of purchase and sale of gutka products is not an offence. The Court noted that gutka is a tobacco product, and hookah is also a tobacco product.

It further relied upon the decision in Waheed Uddin Ahmed Ansar v. Principal Secretary, Home Department, wherein a co-ordinate Bench held that while permission under the City Police Act may be required for establishment of hookah centres and conditions may be imposed, subject to fulfilling the statutory requirements, the police are not to interfere with the business activity, and are at liberty to act only in case of violation of the COTPA Act and Rules.

Hence, placing reliance on the above precedents, the court held that “the Police are not supposed to interfere with the business conducted by the petitioners”.

“Therefore, in light of the above aforementioned discussion and relying upon the cited decision, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners amounts to an abuse of the process of law and is liable to be quashed”, the Court reasoned.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition was allowed, and the proceedings against the petitioners were quashed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, were closed.

Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 10411 of 2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order