Karnataka High Court lays down framework to regulate homestays after rape complaint by US tourist

The Karnataka High Court recently called for a sweeping overhaul of how homestays are regulated across the State, urging the Tourism Department to frame comprehensive, multi-sector policies to address safety, compliance and consumer protection concerns in the industry [PA Ponnappa v. State of Karnataka & Ors]..Justice Suraj Govindaraj indicated that a structured framework covering everything from fire safety and food hygiene to guest verification and environmental compliance was essential to bring consistency and accountability to the sector.Explaining the need for such a framework, the Court observed,“This Court has, of late, been noticing an increasing number of disputes and petitions arising out of actions taken against homestays on the basis of complaints received from tourists, neighbouring residents, local authorities and other stakeholders. The recurring nature of such disputes indicates the need for a more comprehensive and integrated regulatory framework governing homestays in the State.”.Building on this concern, the Court underscored that homestays occupy a unique position within the tourism ecosystem and cannot be treated as ordinary commercial establishments.“A homestay is not merely a commercial establishment; it is a place where members of the public reside, often for extended periods, and where food, accommodation and related services are provided. Consequently, considerations of public safety, health, hygiene, security, consumer protection and civic compliance assume considerable significance,” stated the Court..The Court issued a broad ten-point framework, intended to guide the formulation of a future policy on the issue. They are as follows:The State must mandate robust fire safety norms, including emergency exits, firefighting equipment, evacuation plans and periodic inspections, especially for homestays operating in residential buildings. Authorities must ensure strict compliance with food safety and hygiene standards, with proper licensing, storage norms and regular inspections. Homestays must comply with building regulations, zoning laws and local permissions, including occupancy limits, sanitation rules and environmental safeguards. Operators must maintain guest verification and records and cooperate with law enforcement agencies on security concerns. The framework should include consumer protection measures, such as transparent pricing, clear disclosure of amenities, cancellation policies and grievance redressal. Minimum standards must be prescribed for sanitation, cleanliness, drinking water, waste disposal and environmental sustainability. The policy should ensure coordination among multiple authorities, including tourism, police, food safety, local bodies and environmental agencies. A structured inspection and enforcement system must be introduced, with notice, time to rectify defects, graded penalties and an appellate mechanism. The framework should differentiate between small homestays and large commercial operations, with proportionate compliance requirements. The State should frame a comprehensive, unified policy integrating all these elements for consistent and transparent regulation..Highlighting the need for clarity and consistency in enforcement, the Court said,“Such a framework would also assist authorities in taking informed and legally sustainable decisions while ensuring that actions affecting homestay operators are undertaken in a fair, transparent and predictable manner.".The directions came in a petition filed by the proprietor of a homestay in Kodagu, who challenged the summary cancellation of his registration by district authorities. The cancellation was in light of a sexual assault complaint filed by a US national, who alleged that she was sexually assaulted after being given a drug-laced drink by a worker at the property.The plea had argued that the licence, which was valid until 2029, was cancelled on April 22, 2026, immediately after a First Information Report (FIR). It contended that no notice or opportunity to be heard was given..The High Court agreed, holding that the action could not be sustained as it was taken in violation of basic procedural safeguards. Hence, it set aside the cancellation order, but treated it as a show-cause notice, granting the petitioner two weeks to respond. It also directed the authorities to pass a fresh order after due process.The matter will be taken up again in July..Advocate Angad Kamath appeared for the petitioner.Government Advocate Shamanth Naik represented the State..[Read Order]