BENGALURU – The Principal City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru has granted regular bail to three individuals arrested in connection with a raid on an illegal hookah bar operating on Brigade Road. The court, presided over by Shri Muralidhara Pai B., ruled that the custodial interrogation of the accused was no longer necessary as the primary investigation and seizure of materials had been completed.
The bail order pertains to two separate petitions: Crl. Misc. No. 3083/2024 filed by Shripal (Accused No. 2) and Crl. Misc. No. 3152/2024 filed by Gowtham and Lokesh Panwar (Accused Nos. 1 and 3). All three were apprehended following a crackdown on the “New Hashtag Cafe” hookah bar, located on the 5th floor of Hotel Royal Brigade.
Background of the Case and Police Raid
The legal proceedings were initiated following a report by Sri Mahadevaiah S., a Police Inspector with the Organized Crime Wing of the Central Crime Branch (CCB), Bengaluru. On March 25, 2024, the CCB received intelligence that a hookah bar was being operated in violation of recent government bans and health safety regulations.
Upon raiding the premises, the Ashok Nagar Police reportedly found 30 to 35 customers engaged in smoking hookah. The police seized hookah pots, pipes, and various tobacco packets and containers allegedly containing poisonous substances and molasses extracts. The prosecution contended that Gowtham and Shripal were the owners of the establishment, while Lokesh Panwar served as the cashier.
The accused were booked under several stringent legislations, including:
- Sections 284 and 328 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Pertaining to negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substances and causing hurt by means of poison with intent to commit an offense.
- Sections 20(2), 7, and 21 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (COTPA): Relating to the illegal sale and advertisement of tobacco products.
- Sections 59, 63, and 52 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006: Concerning the sale of unsafe food and penalties for carrying out a business without a license.
- Section 6 of the Poisons Act, 1919: Regarding the unlawful possession of specified poisons.
Arguments Presented by the Defense
Legal counsel for the petitioners argued that their clients were innocent and had been falsely implicated to cause them disrepute. The defense highlighted that the “New Hashtag Cafe” held valid GST registration and a license under the Food Safety and Standards Act to operate as a restaurant and vending establishment.
Regarding Shripal (Accused No. 2), the defense argued there was no evidence linking him to the ownership of the business. For Lokesh Panwar (Accused No. 3), it was emphasized that he was merely a salaried employee (cashier) and not responsible for the management or policy decisions of the cafe. Furthermore, the defense contended that the mandatory procedures for search and seizure were not followed by the raiding party.
Judicial Observations and Analysis
In evaluating the bail plea, the court noted that the state of Karnataka had only recently implemented a formal notification banning hookah bars in the interest of public health. Prior to this, such businesses were operating under different legal interpretations.
Judge Muralidhara Pai B. observed that the offenses alleged, while serious, are not punishable by death or imprisonment for life. The court took significant note of the fact that the CCB and Ashok Nagar Police had already conducted the raid, seized the incriminatory articles, and interrogated the accused.
The court found that the prosecution failed to provide prima facie evidence linking Shripal to the co-ownership of the cafe. It also acknowledged the documentation proving that the business was a proprietorship belonging to Gowtham. Regarding the cashier, Lokesh Panwar, the court noted that as an employee, his level of liability differed from that of the owners.
The court concluded that the continued detention of the petitioners was unnecessary for the purpose of the investigation. The judge stated that the apprehension of the prosecution regarding the accused absconding or tampering with witnesses could be addressed through strict bail conditions.
Terms and Conditions of the Bail
The court allowed the petitions and ordered the release of Shripal, Gowtham, and Lokesh Panwar on bail subject to the following conditions:
- Bond and Surety: Each petitioner must execute a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
- Witness Protection: The petitioners are strictly prohibited from tampering with prosecution witnesses in any manner.
- Cooperation: They must appear before the Investigating Officer or the Court as directed and cooperate with all further proceedings.
- Residence Details: The petitioners must furnish their present residential address, registered mobile numbers, and e-mail IDs supported by valid documents.
- Movement Restrictions: They shall not change their place of residence during the pendency of the case without prior permission from the court.
- Surety Documentation: Address proof for the sureties must be provided at the time of executing the bail bonds.
This ruling allows the accused to rejoin their families while the legal process continues toward a trial to determine their actual liability under the various health and safety laws cited by the Bengaluru police.