The Meghalaya High Court has ruled that objections based solely on moral concerns raised by church leaders or local residents cannot be used to prevent the operation of a liquor outlet that has been licensed in accordance with the law.
Justice HS Thangkhiew directed the authorities to allow the petitioner to operate her Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) retail outlet at Danakgre in Meghalaya’s West Garo Hills district, holding that all statutory requirements for relocating the shop had been fulfilled.
Background Of The Case
The petitioner had shifted the outlet from Jengjal market after obtaining permission from the Excise Department in January 2025. She also secured a no-objection certificate from the local Nokma, the traditional village head, and held a valid licence for the outlet.
Despite these approvals, she approached the High Court alleging that the Superintendent of Excise had ordered the closure of the shop following objections from local church elders and members of a development committee.
Court Finds No Legal Violation
The High Court noted that official inquiries found no breach of the Meghalaya Excise Act or the applicable Excise Rules. The reports also confirmed that the liquor outlet was located beyond the mandatory 200-metre distance from places of worship, educational institutions and hospitals.
The court observed that the objections raised against the outlet were founded on moral considerations rather than any legal or substantive grounds capable of justifying cancellation of the licence or preventing the business from operating.
Legal Licence Cannot Be Curtailed Without Due Process
While reiterating that there is no fundamental right to trade in liquor, the High Court held that a licence granted in accordance with statutory provisions creates a legal right that cannot be taken away except through the procedure established by law.
The court further took note of official reports indicating that a licensed restaurant-cum-bar was already functioning around 105 metres from the petitioner’s outlet. It also referred to findings that illegal liquor sales were widespread in the locality, observing that the presence of a legally authorised retail outlet could help reduce bootlegging.
Finding that the petitioner’s licence and all permissions remained valid and that the objections lacked legal basis, the High Court directed the authorities to permit the operation of the IMFL retail outlet at its relocated premises.
