People Who Buy Liquor Should Not Be Treated Like Cattle: Kerala High Court Directs Excise Commissioner To Ensure Proper Infrastructure At Liquor Stores

The Kerala High Court on Thursday directed the Excise Commissioner to not default in complying with the instructions passed by the Court regarding appropriate infrastructure being made available at the liquor outlets in the State. Justice Devan Ramachandran also notified the authorities that he had received a letter from a woman dated 7th September concerned about a particular outlet situated at Ramamangalam town which one among the outlets listed to be removed. In the letter, the house maker has expressed her agitation that it has now been moved to a place nearer to the main road, opposite Canara Bank. She was anxious that if it was allowed to continue in the new location, where people visiting the bank itself find it difficult to park their cars, it would lead to a chaotic situation. It was also mentioned in the letter that women and girls were already terrified of walking through the street, past the outlet.The Court incorporated this letter into the file and asked BEVCO to consider the plea. To this, Standing Counsel for BEVCO Advocate Naveen T responded that if every letter in this issue is entertained, the matter will never be settled. "How many letters have I shown you till date? I have received around 50 letters in this regard from several persons so far. There is a reason I incorporated this letter into the file when the remaining 49 were not. I find merit in this letter. You don't understand. The country is not what you think today. Women are frightened to step out of their homes. They fear for their lives. If something happens to them, most of them do not even have the resources to be represented by a lawyer. "The Counsel thereby informed the Court that the outlet mentioned in the letter will be reviewed. The Bench directed the authorities to not disclose the identity of the woman in any manner. Following this, Senior Advocate Ranjith Thampan apprised the Court that out of 38 shops initially proposed to be relocated, 33 had sought retention. Upon careful scrutiny of these 33 stores, the authorities recently approved their retention at the current locations, while the remaining five will have to be shifted.The Court observed that it was in this context that the contents of the letter became significant. "The letter cites an outlet which was upgraded in a manner that causes more inconvenience to the public than before. That is the concern I am raising. Will the same happen with every relocation? Then the entire scheme will become futile. " The Senior Counsel also suggested that the number of liquor outlets may be increased to cater to the needs of the public in the State. The Court however ruled that this was a decision to be made by the Excise Commissioner and the State, and refuse to interfere with the same.The Bench thereafter asserted that it did not intend to interfere with people consuming or the State selling liquor. "I have no problem with people drinking or the government selling liquor. I am worried about the collective dignity of the citizenry like I have repeated time and again. People who buy liquor should not be treated like cattle, and the people who walk past these outlets cannot be subjected to ridicule or embarrassment of any kind."Senior Government Pleader S Kannan presented accurate statistics of the progress made so far in the matter. Initially, 96 liquor outlets were found to be lacking basic facilities, out of which 89 belonged to BEVCO, while 7 operated under the Consumer Federation. After elaborate consideration, instructions have been given to relocate 32 stores, while 57 have been directed to be upgraded with additional facilities. These numbers were recorded by the Court. These developments ensued in a contempt petition regarding the non-implementation of the Court's order to provide a dignified way to citizens to purchase liquor from BEVCO outlets. It also addressed the overcrowding in front of these stores. This order was passed four years ago. "It took four years to implement the essence of my judgment. I remember I passed this judgment one year after becoming a judge. Now it has been five years. Thanks to the pandemic, it's making headway. Sometimes, Covid is good."The Bench also opined that the Excise Commissioner had to shoulder the entire responsibility of complying with the directions issued by the Court in the said judgment since he was the statutory authority accountable for the same. "I am making very clear to you; if I receive another complaint from the public in the issue, I will not come after BEVCO or the Consumer Federation. I will directly summon the Excise Commissioner." At the next hearing, the parties were directed to inform the Court of various steps taken to improve the functioning of the outlets in compliance with the directions of the Court in its judgment. The matter will be taken up again on 18th October. Case Title: My Hindustan Paints v.S. Aanathakrishnan IPSClick Here To Download The Order

People Who Buy Liquor Should Not Be Treated Like Cattle: Kerala High Court Directs Excise Commissioner To Ensure Proper Infrastructure At Liquor Stores

Hannah M Varghese

Tags