Licensed Foreign Liquor Shop Can't Be Shut Down On Moral Objections If It Complies With Excise Law: Meghalaya High Court

The Meghalaya High Court has held that once an IMFL retail vend satisfies the statutory requirements under the Meghalaya Excise Act and Rules and possesses a valid licence, the authorities cannot prevent its operation merely because of objections based on moral considerations.

Justice H.S. Thangkhiew observed that: “Though a citizen has no fundamental right to trade or do business in liquor, the same however, being regulated by the State under the Meghalaya Excise Act and Rules... the satisfaction or fulfillment of conditions as prescribed, would surely vest the petitioner with a legal right which cannot be taken away except by due process”.

Background

The petitioner, a licensed IMFL retailer, had been operating a wine shop at Jengjal Market, West Garo Hills, pursuant to a licence granted in 2022. Owing to business convenience, she sought permission to shift the outlet to Danakgre after obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the local Nokma (Headman). The Excise Department approved the relocation on January 29, 2025, following a spot inspection.

However, despite possessing all requisite approvals, the Superintendent of Excise orally directed her to shut down the relocated shop. Aggrieved by the closure despite having a valid licence and permission to shift, she approached the High Court seeking directions to allow her to continue operating the outlet. 

The Court held that the petitioner's wine shop complied with Rule 183(2)(a) of the Meghalaya Excise Rules, as it was situated beyond the prohibited 200-metre radius from places of worship, educational institutions and hospitals. It further noted that the petitioner had obtained a valid licence, secured the required NOC from the Nokma/landowner under Rule 191, and had received approval from the competent authority to shift the shop from Jengjal to Danakgre. 

The Court found that the objections raised by the Church representatives and Development Committee were founded on moral considerations rather than any statutory violation warranting cancellation of the licence.

The Court observed that the churches represented by the objectors were situated beyond the prescribed 200-metre limit. It also noted that another establishment holding an "ON" licence was already operating only about 105 metres away, while reopening the licensed wine shop could help curb illegal liquor sales in the locality.

The Court reiterated that although there is no fundamental right to trade in liquor, once the statutory conditions under the Meghalaya Excise Act and Rules are fulfilled, the licensee acquires a legal right that cannot be taken away except through due process.

Thus, the Court held that since the petitioner possessed the requisite licence and permissions and the objections were legally untenable, there was no justification for preventing the petitioner from operating the wine shop.

Case Name: Smti.Legitha v. State of Meghalaya

Case No.: WP (C) No.664 of 2025

Decision Date: 18.06.2026