The Karnataka High Court has brought an end to criminal proceedings against Bengaluru’s Le Meridien hotel and two of its senior officials in a case concerning an allegedly unauthorised hoarding installed on the hotel premises.
Justice H.P. Sandesh allowed petitions filed by Le Meridien and its Vice President (Finance) and Company Secretary, M.S. Reddy, and quashed the proceedings initiated under the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1981.
The case stemmed from an FIR registered by the High Grounds Police in October 2018. The complaint alleged that a hoarding displayed at the hotel violated Section 3 of the Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act.
A key issue before the High Court was that the company owning the hotel, M/s Mac Charles, had not been made an accused in the criminal case.
The Court pointed out that Section 6 of the Act specifically deals with offences committed by companies and requires the company concerned to be arraigned. Since Mac Charles had not been included as an accused, the Court found that allowing the prosecution against the individual petitioners to continue would amount to an abuse of the legal process.
The Court observed that the power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could therefore be exercised in the circumstances.
The fact that the hoarding stood on private property did not, by itself, place it beyond the scope of the law. The Court noted that advertisements and hoardings erected on private premises can still fall within regulatory requirements when they are visible from public roads.
The petitioners had also referred to proceedings concerning demand notices issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike towards hoarding and billboard taxes. An earlier interim order had granted them protection subject to payment of 50 percent of the amount demanded.
The High Court clarified, however, that the interim protection in those proceedings did not prevent the authorities from initiating criminal action. The demand notices and the subsequent criminal case operated in different contexts, particularly as the prosecution followed an opportunity given to remove the hoarding.
Despite this, the Court held that the absence of the hotel-owning company as an accused was fatal to the continuation of the criminal proceedings.
The proceedings against Le Meridien and M.S. Reddy were accordingly quashed.