K.C. Cinema (Correct Name K.C. Theatre) vs State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
Background
Two advocates filed a public interest litigation in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court complaining that cinema halls in the State ban movie-goers from bringing their own food and water inside, forcing them to buy expensive "junk" food at the hall's own counters. In July 2018 the High Court agreed, holding that the State's Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1975 nowhere permit such a ban and that it violates the right to choice of food and good health under Article 21; it directed all cinema owners in the State not to stop viewers from carrying their own food and water. K.C. Theatre and other cinema owners appealed to the Supreme Court; similar petitions pending in the Delhi and Bombay High Courts were transferred and heard together.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court's direction. It held that running a cinema is a business protected by Article 19(1)(g), and since neither the 1975 Rules nor any other law requires theatre owners to permit outside food, the High Court had overstepped its Article 226 jurisdiction by inventing such an obligation: writ power must be exercised consistently with the legislative scheme, not to rewrite it. A cinema hall is private property; the owner reserves the right of admission and may fix terms of entry so long as they do not offend public interest, safety or welfare, and a no-outside-food rule (like a restaurant not letting customers bring their own meals, or concerts and museums restricting what patrons do) is a legitimate commercial choice to boost food-and-beverage revenue. Viewers are not compelled to buy anything once inside, so their right to choose food is not infringed; and applying the "unequal bargaining power" test from Central Inland Water Transport v. Brojo Nath Ganguly, the Court found this condition is not unfair, unreasonable or unconscionable. The Court recorded the theatres' assurances that free hygienic drinking water is provided and that reasonable food for infants is allowed, and requested owners to consider case-by-case requests from viewers with medical dietary restrictions. The transferred Delhi and Bombay petitions were dismissed.
Lesson Learnt
A private business may set its own conditions of entry, including a ban on outside food, unless a statute says otherwise, and courts cannot use writ jurisdiction to impose obligations the law itself does not create. Consumers unhappy with such terms may choose not to patronise the business, or sue for a concrete loss, but cannot demand that a High Court legislate new rules for the industry.