The Kerala High Court Bench comprising Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran while hearing the clubbed Petitions and Appeals challenging the Order of the Lower court relating to the Liquor ban observed that when the sale of liquor is prohibited for a few days to ensure peace, preserving public order and for the public good, commercial interests are not taken as a priority even if it leads to sale disruptions.
Brief Facts:
The writ appeals arise from the refusal of the Learned Single Judge to stay the separate impugned orders passed by two District Collectors prohibiting the sale of liquor by FL3 licensees and licensed toddy shops existing within an area surrounding three different locations where religious festivals were being held.
These Petitions were clubbed together in the present case to resolve the issue in depth.
Contentions of the Appellants:
It was argued that the FL3 licensees were spending huge amounts for taking such licenses and the prohibition imposed even for a single day would cause immense prejudice to the licensees and profits, especially since there is no remission license fee granted because of the prohibition.
It was submitted that the Appellants were not served notice and were granted an opportunity for a hearing.
Further, District authorities have to ensure law and order, even in areas where festivals are conducted and they cannot abdicate their powers by issuing blanket orders prohibiting in such areas. There is no real apprehension as can be discerned from the various orders and the offences referred to in one of such orders are all minor offences under S.151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
It was also pointed out that despite the prohibition having been extended to large areas it does not prevent a person from having liquor from outside the prohibited area and coming to the festival. The prohibition does not offer any mitigation to violence or unruly behaviour because of intoxication.
Contentions of the State:
It was contended that there was real apprehension entertained by the District Collector based on the crimes reported in the area previously, also during the festival times, and the reports of the District Police Chief which sought such prohibition. It was pointed out that on real apprehension, the orders have been issued and there would be a convergence of people of different hues and faith in the festival grounds and there would be many coming to the festival for mere merry-making and not necessarily with a religious bend of mind.
Observation of the Court:
The Court noted that the licensees made substantial investments to carry on liquor vending, both foreign liquor and toddy. However, it was opined that the disruption of sales for one or two days especially with the object of maintaining peace, for the public good and preservation of public order, relegates commercial considerations to the back seat.
Further, it was ruled that as per Section 54 of the Kerala Abkari Act, the notice does not necessarily speak of an opportunity for a hearing. The notice in writing is only insofar as notice to the licensee to close down a shop, in which intoxicating liquor or drug is sold, for the preservation of public peace, which notice is only to enable the licensee to arrange his affairs accordingly. The licensee of a liquor shop has absolutely no say in the preservation of public peace and a hearing conducted would be futile since they cannot instruct the District Administration as to how the law-and-order situation within their jurisdictional limits is to be maintained peacefully.
It was remarked that often the unruly behaviour leading to crime rises with intoxication.
The decision of the Court:
Based on the aforementioned reasons, the Appeals were dismissed by ordering costs to the parties.
Case Title: Hotel Hillway Park Vs. State of Kerala & Others and connected cases
Coram: Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran
Case No: Writ Appeal No.489/2023 & con. Cases
Advocate for Petitioner/Appellant: Sri Thomas Abraham and Adv. Niresh Mathew and Ors.
Advocate of Respondent: Adv. Sri T.K. Vipindas
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
