Gopal Krishan Vyas, J. - (1.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of non-petitioners.
(2.) By way of filing the present petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code., the petitioners have challenged the orders dated 8.6.2005 and 2.9.2005 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gharsana Under Section 133 Criminal Procedure Code.
(3.) During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has produced before this Court two affidavits of Abdul Sattar S/o Abdul Rehman, proprietor of Asha Video Parlour, Rawla Mandi, Gharsana and Satpal S/o Hansraj, proprietor of Shiva Video Parlour, Rawla Mandi, Gharsana, mentioning therein that at the time of issuance of licence, they both have deposited the security bond of Rs. 10,000/- under the provisions of Rajasthan Entertainment and Advertisement Tax Act, 1957. It has also been mentioned in both the affidavits that Gram Panchayat, 8 PSD Rawla Mandi, District Sri Ganganagar, has also issued NOC in their favour and licence was issued to them by the concerned authorities after inspection and examining the facilities provided by them. It has also been mentioned in para-5 of the affidavits that parlour is having proper air facility, for which four ceiling fans and one exhaust fan is also lying there because the parlour is situated in a basement, for sitting arrangements, it is mentioned that plastic chairs are fixed and in case of any emergency, there is proper arrangements; a separate toilet along with a bathroom with light facility has also been provided. Certain photographs have also been produced along with the affidavits. Both the affidavits along with the photographs are taken on record.;