ASHFAK AHMED SHIRHATTI S/O MODINSAB v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
WP/101890/2025 · 2025-04-22
Jyoti Mulimani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52395 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52395 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6704 WP No. 101890 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 101890 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
ASHFAK AHMED SHIRHATTI S/O MODINSAB, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, OWNER OF ‘THE PAN STUDIO’, AKSHAY COLONY, OPP. NALANDA COLLEGE, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI-580 023.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROHIT.L.SHEELAVANT., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, HUBLI-DHARWAD, DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-580 001.
3.
POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, GOKUL ROAD POLICE STATION, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580 023.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN.K.UPPAR., AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.
Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6704 WP No. 101890 of 2025
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.Rohit L.Sheelvant., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Praveen K.Uppar., AGA for the respondents have appeared in person.
2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with day today business of the petitioner i.e., The Pan Studio situated at Akshay Colony, Opposite Nalanda College, Vidyanagar and permit the petitioner to run the business till 1:00 a.m., as per the Notification/ Official Memorandum dated:19.09.2024 vide Annexure-E and also as per the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.106364/2024 (GM-Police), vide Annexure-D.
3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.
4. The short controversy is about the interference by the Police Authorities in day today business of the petitioner.
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:6704 WP No. 101890 of 2025
Suffice it to note that a Notification was issued on 19.09.2024 by extending the time limit for business hours till 1:00 a.m. Because of the extension of the business hours, the Police Authorities shall not interfere with the day today business of the petitioner. Needless to say, the petitioner and the Police Authorities must adhere to the time limit as prescribed under the Notification. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP,RH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 64