JUDGMENT (Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in C.C.No.1524 of 2019 pending trial on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and quash the same.) 1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1524 of 2019 on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2. The petitioners are the accused nos.1, 2, 5 and 6. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.12.2017, the then Inspector of Police, T.P.Chathiram Police Station, on information went to Soul Garden Vegetarian Restaurant at No.86/59, New Avadi Road along with his police team and found Hookah smoking spot in the name of “Sheesha”; on seeing the police team, the petitioners and others attempted to escape from the place of occurrence; they quarrelled with the respondent and the respondent had to use minimum force to secure them; on enquiry, it was found that the petitioners and others without licence allowed the public to smoke prohibited item namely Hookah; after the completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the accused for the offences under Section 6(b), 24(2), 7(1) of The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 [hereinafter referred to as “COTP Act”]. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in order to make out a case for an offence under Section 6(b) of COTP Act, there should be material to show that the sale of cigarette or other tobacco products to a person below the age of eighteen years and within a radius of one hundred yards of any educational institution. However, no such material was available. He further submitted that Section 7(1) of COTP Act deals with restrictions on trade, commerce, production, supply and distribution of cigarettes and other tobacco products without a pictorial warning as prescribed; but the facts of the case does not disclose the same. In fact, the prosecution itself has stated that they found Hookah smoking spot in the name of “Sheesha”. Hookah is not a prohibited one. It is a by-product of tobacco. There is absolutely no ingredients to make out a case for the offences under Sections 353 and 506(i) of IPC and they have added just to exaggerate the case. 4. In fact, the prosecution itself has stated that they found Hookah smoking spot in the name of “Sheesha”. Hookah is not a prohibited one. It is a by-product of tobacco. There is absolutely no ingredients to make out a case for the offences under Sections 353 and 506(i) of IPC and they have added just to exaggerate the case. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioners are involved in encouraging the public to smoke Hookah which is a tobacco product; the conditions prescribed under the COTP Act had been violated; the Soul Garden Vegetarian Restaurant is situated within one hundred yards from St.George Anglo Indian Higher Secondary School; since the materials on record can make out the offences for which the petitioners are charged, they should be subjected to the process of trial. 5. The F.I.R. has been registered consequent to the inspection made by the charge sheet witness (L.W.1); he went to the spot on getting certain information. According to the statement of the complainant, the accused on seeing the police party tried to run away. Though it is stated in the F.I.R. that the accused were distributing banned tobacco products to the public, no statement from any public is obtained. The whole prosecution is based upon the alleged confession given by the accused and for which, the police party themselves stood as witnesses. Even in the seizure mahazar, no independent witness is seen to be available. 6. As already stated L.W.2 and L.W.3 are the police witnesses and they alone stood as witnesses in both confession and recovery. L.W.4 and L.W.5, who are persons living near the place of occurrence. And they have not stated that they have seen the accused distributing the tobacco products to the public. None of the witnesses had stated that the distance between the place of occurrence and nor had they mentioned that any educational institution is situated within a radius of one hundred yards. One of the essential ingredients to make out a case for an offence under Section 6(b) of COTP Act is that the tobacco product ought to have been sold to a person, who is under 18 years of age and it should be in an area within a radius of one hundred yards of any educational institution. One of the essential ingredients to make out a case for an offence under Section 6(b) of COTP Act is that the tobacco product ought to have been sold to a person, who is under 18 years of age and it should be in an area within a radius of one hundred yards of any educational institution. The materials available on record do not disclose the presence of either of the ingredients. 7. Even in the charge sheet nothing was mentioned about the sale, production or distribution of any tobacco products by the accused. As stated already, no statement of independent witness is also available. The entire case is based upon the alleged confession given by the accused to L.W.1, Inspector of Police, in the presence of the police party, who stood as witnesses. Even though the accused charged under Sections 353 and 506(i) IPC along with other offences under Sections 6(b), 24(2), 7(1) of COTP Act, there is absolutely no material to make out the offence under Sections 353 and 506(i) IPC. 8. As already submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, these charges appear to have been made without any ground materials. The statement of the witnesses, especially the police witnesses would show that the accused had never prevented the police from executing their public duty or threatened them with dire consequences. Without producing any material to support or substantiate the charges, the charge sheet has been filed with bald averments and based on the confession of L.W.1. Hence, I feel the proceedings as against the petitioners are liable to be quashed. 9. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.1524 of 2019 pending on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, is quashed as against these petitioners. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.