The submissions were made before Justice Murali Purushothaman in a counter affidavit filed by the agency in a writ petition challenging police notices restricting DJ events beyond 11 p.m in Radisson Blu Hotel.

The petitioner has sought to quash the notices issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police and the Station House Officer, Kadavanthra Police Station, contending that the hotel is entitled to operate until 3 a.m. under an extension granted by the Excise Department.

The police, however, argued that the extension permits only the lawful operation of the bar and service of liquor and meals, and does not confer an unrestricted right to conduct late-night DJ programmes or entertainment events.

According to the police, the writ petition suppresses material facts and fails to acknowledge that the restrictions are aimed solely at regulating high-decibel DJ events and large late-night gatherings, rather than preventing the hotel from conducting its licensed business. The affidavit states that police have never interfered with the lawful sale of liquor or operation of the bar until 3 a.m., but only with entertainment activities extending beyond the prescribed time.

The counter statement alleges that repeated incidents of violence, drug offences and public disorder were reported from the hotel during 2026. It refers to three criminal cases registered by Kadavanthra Police, including an alleged violent clash between rival groups inside the hotel, an NDPS case in which eight persons were arrested following a raid on an alleged rave party, and another case relating to property damage and rioting during a DJ event. The police state that investigations in some of these cases are continuing.

The police further pointed to two additional NDPS cases registered near the hotel on April 30, 2026, involving alleged cannabis consumption by individuals intercepted in the vicinity of the premises, arguing that these incidents reinforce concerns about narcotics-related activity around late-night entertainment venues.

The affidavit relies on Sections 77, 78 and 79 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011, which empower police authorities to regulate noise, prevent violence and control public assemblies in the interest of maintaining public order and safety. The police contend that the Excise Department's extension of bar operating hours does not override these statutory powers.

“These provisions apply to 'DJ parties' as their number and volume have as commercial events attracting large crowds, creating risks of public nuisance, disorder, and law and order issues, thereby justifying restrictions beyond 11:00 P.M. as a preventive measure to ensure public safety and tranquility.” affidavit stated.

The affidavit also details the sequence of police notices issued to the petitioner. It states that one notice directed the hotel to stop amplified music after 10 p.m. in compliance with Supreme Court directions on noise pollution, while another was issued following the detection of alleged NDPS offences connected to a late-night rave party. A subsequent notice formalised an 11 p.m. cut-off for DJ events after a meeting with stakeholders.

According to the police, city-wide reports from police stations and the District Special Branch indicated that late-night DJ events had increasingly been associated with public nuisance, offences under the NDPS Act and crimes against women. Acting on these reports, the Commissioner of Police issued orders on April 28 and May 16, 2026, prescribing that DJ programmes should not continue beyond 11 p.m.

The police stated that the number of commercial DJ venues in Kochi has increased from three to more than 34, with entry fees ranging from ₹1,500 to ₹6,000 and table reservations reportedly costing up to ₹20,000. The affidavit claims that Kochi City Police have registered 27 criminal cases linked to such late-night events, including narcotics offences, unlawful gatherings and crimes against women, necessitating stricter regulation.

The petitioners, in a reply affidavit, have stated that the discrimination based on large scale gathering after 11:00 PM, but permitting till 11:00 PM have no rationale. It is further submitted in the reply affidavit that there is no existence of provision restricting the DJ parties before or after the time fixed by the police.

It is further argued that the actions of the police are in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India under Article 19(1)(g).

The matter is posted on 13 July for further consideration.

Case Title: Mahadevan v State of Kerala and Ors.

Case No: WP(C) 17410/ 2026

Counsel for Petitioner: Anand Kalayankrishnan, S. Rajeev, C. Dheeraj Rajan, V. Vinay, M.S. Aneer, Libin Varghese

Counsel for Respondent: P.A Mohammed Shah (Addl. AG)