Mumbai:Mumbai: Bombay High Court has quashed and set aside orders that refused a performance licence for orchestra/live music to a Khar (W) bar and restaurant, apprehending a law and order problem.Justice N J Jamadar on Sept 16 said, “The authorities proceeded to refuse a performance licence despite the petitioner complying with all requirements…” He directed the licensing authority to grant the licence within four weeks.The petition was filed by a company that operates Magmus Bar and Restaurant on SV Road. On its application, senior inspector (Khar) and ACP (Bandra) issued NOC. However, on Oct 1, 2025, licensing/competent authority, DCP (HQ-hotel branch), rejected the application, stating it may lead to a law and order problem and disturb social harmony. On June 2, the company’s appeal was dismissed by the divisional commissioner (Konkan).The state replied that the subordinate officers’ reports were recommendatory and not binding on the DCP. State’s advocate V R Raje said the authorities considered crimes were registered against the directors, the orchestra would lead to unruly patrons, increasedtraffic and complaints of altercationswith neighbours and residents.Agreeing with petitioner’s advocate Bernardo Reis, Justice Jamadar said DCP’s order did not give “any reason or divulge the material” that would justify that granting a licence may lead to a law and order problem. The Khar SI’s site report said the establishment was in a commercial area, the road in front was over 40 feet wide, there were no religious places, hospitals or educational institutions within a 75 m radius, parking was available and the premises were soundproof.Justice Jamadar said undoubtedly the grant of licence is the discretion of the competent authority, but it cannot be completely “unbridled”. The exercise of power is regulated by Public Performance Rules. “A mere ipse dixit (bare assertion) of the competent authority that the grant of licence may lead to law and order problem, without anything more, cannot be sustained,” he added. He noted that HC had quashed two criminal cases against the directors and that the complaints were filed after DCP’s order. The impugned orders “suffer from the vice of unreasonableness and arbitrariness,” he concluded.
