SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Ker) 147

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, C. JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
Hotel Hillway Park, Murukkumon, Nilamel P.O., Kollam Represented By Its Proprietor Vanju Kamal, S/o. Late S. Kamalasanan - Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Its Secretary, Taxes Department, Government Of Kerala, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, Pin – 695001 and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Appeal Nos. 489 of 2023, 491 of 2023, 494 of 2023, 495 of 2023, 497 of 2023 & 498 of 2023, WP(C) Nos. 6678 of 2023, 6774 of 2023, 6777 of 2023, 6816 of 2023, 6878 of 2023 & 6917 of 2023
Decided On : 02-03-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Thomas Abraham, Merciamma Mathew, Aswin. P. John, R. Ananthapadmanaban, Paul Baby.
For the Respondents: Sri. T.K. Vipindas.

Point of Law: Crimes that arose solely due to consumption of liquor are also detailed, where serious offences under IPC are seen charged.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 151 - Abkari Act, 1077 – Section 54 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Religious festivals are being held - Prohibiting sale of liquor by FL3 licensees - Appeals arise from refusal to stay separate impugned orders prohibiting sale of liquor by FL3 licensees and licensed toddy shops existing within an area where religious festivals are being held – Disruption of sales for one or two days especially with object of maintaining peace, for public good and preservation of public order, relegates commercial considerations to back seat - Para 13.

Finding of the Court: Court understand that licensees have made substantial investments to carry on liquor vending, both foreign liquor and toddy - Disruption of sales for one or two days especially with object of maintaining peace, for public good and preservation of public order, relegates commercial considerations to back seat - As is case with Thrissur Pooram, festivities in all the three sites have a profusion of pyrotechnics, musical ensemble, colourful displays on caparisoned elephants, exhibitions, fares and like, providing sufficient entertainment without being further enthused and infused with toxicity of liquor - True, there could still be drunkenness and brawls resulting from that; but there would be sufficient mitigation and reduced instances, if proximate access to liquor is prohibited.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

[K. Vinod Chandran, J.]

1. The writ appeals arise from the refusal of the learned Single Judge to stay the separate impugned orders passed by two District Collectors prohibiting sale of liquor by FL3 licensees and licensed toddy shops existing within an area surrounding three different locations where religious festivals are being held. The orders passed were identical and one of such orders followed the earlier orders. We called for the writ petitions also on consent of the parties, since the disposal of the appeals either way would dispose of the writ petitions also.

2. We have to notice the facts insofar as the location, the genesis and the area of prohibition as coming out from the separate impugned orders in the writ petitions. In W.A No.489/23 the District Collector, Kollam issued Ext.P2 order dt. 16.02.2023 prohibiting sale of liquor within the Police Station limits of Kadakkal, Chithara and Chadayamangalam on 02.03.2023, in connection with the ‘Kumbhathiruvathira’ festival in Kadakkal Devi Temple. The very same order is challenged in W.A No.494/2023 by another FL 3 licensee within the same area, the order produced as Ext.P2. In W.A No.491/2023 the impugned order Ext.P2 is dt. 17.02.2023 issued by the District Collector, Palakkad in connection with Manappullikkavu Vela proposed to be conducted on 02.03.2023, again specifically prohibiting sale of liquor by Bars including Toddy Shops located within Palakkad Municipality, Kannadi and Marutha Road Panchayaths on the said day. W.A No.498/2023 also challenges the order dt 16.02.2023 and W.A No.497/2023 challenges the order dt.17.02.2023 issued respectively by the District Collectors of Kollam and Palakkad; the challenge being raised by an FL3 licensee and licensees of Toddy Shops respectively. W.A 495/2023 is an order issued by the District Collector, Palakkad of a similar prohibition in connection with Pattambi Nercha within the Pattambi Municipal limits by the shops and outlets and the Karimban Kadavu outlet of the Kerala Beverages Corporation on two days, 04.03.2023 and 05.03.2023.

3. The learned Single Judge looked at S.54 of the Act and from the order, found the District Magistrate having adverted to adverse reports regarding the apprehension of disruption of law and order including that of the District Police Chief. The decision of a Division Bench in State of Kerala v. Mary Kurian and others in W.A No.391/2018 and connected cases dated 12.02.2018 was distinguished and reliance was placed on Aneesh V. District Collector [2012(2) KLT 91] to uphold the impugned orders.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri Thomas Abraham specifically relied on Mary Kurian (supra) to contend that the Division Bench had followed an earlier Division Bench decision, both with reference to Maramon Convention held yearly at Kozhanchery, Pathanamthitta; which earlier decision is produced as Ext.P3 in W.A No.495/2023 and the recent one as Ext.P5. It was argued that unlike Toddy Shops the FL3 licensees are spending huge amounts for taking such license and prohibition imposed even for a single day would cause immense prejudice to the licensees and eat into their profits, especially since there is no remission of licence fee granted by reason of the prohibition. In Mary Kurian (supra) this Court had specifically deprecated the conduct of the District Collector in having acted upon the complaint raised by the General Secretary of the Convention which is almost similar in the instant cases also; the request having been generated by the Committee conducting such festival. S.54 is pointed out to show that the first limb requires a notice, which also brings within it an opportunity of hearing; which was not afforded to the appellants who were the licensees. It is also argued that the second limb empowers any Magistrate or even a Police Officer present in a location to require a licensed shop to be closed, on a real apprehension of a riot or unlawful assembly within the vicinity

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top