Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 908 (AP)

TNR Wines v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2018-12-18

C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

body2018
ORDER : C. Praveen Kumar, J. Challenging the order passed by the third respondent in RC.121/2018/B1 dated 26.11.2018 wherein the A4 licence of the petitioner shop came to be cancelled, the present Writ Petition is filed. 2. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition would show that the petitioner, who obtained a valid licence on 30.06.2017, was running a wine shop in the name and style of M/s. TNR Wines at Chandrasekharapuram village, Prakasam District. While so, on 03.07.2018 at about 6.00 p.m., the Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspector along with his team surprised M/s. Kalyani Wines, Hazeespuram and found the nowkar (A-1) transacting business. On search, the raid party found liquor cartoons containing 32 of Officer's Choice Reserve Whisky 180 ml. of which 28 bottles were affixed with heals and four without heals. They also found 7 Heavens Door Whisky bottles 180 ml. affixed with heals. On enquiry, the nowkarnama admitted that the other nowkar used to fill the Officer's Choice Reserve Whisky with liquor from Heaven Door Whisky bottles and affix the heals of the above said Heaven Door Whisky bottles on Officer's Choice Reserve Whisky bottles. It was further confessed that the said process was regularly done for sale of cheap liquor at a minimum price. According to him, the property was seized and nowkar was also arrested. Later on the STF team proceeded to M/s. Nandini Wines at Utsumvaripalli village and found one Nandikatta Ramana Reddy (A-2) transacting business. On demand, he revealed that he is relative of nowkarnama holder of that shop and acting as an assistant in sales. On interrogation, it was revealed that nowkar of M/s.Kalyani wines is mixing cheap liquor for gaining profits. The cheap liquor prepared therein was said to have been sold through the shop as well. The nowkarnama was arrested and the liquor was seized apart from drawing samples. A case in Crime No.65 of 2018 was registered against M/s.Kalyani Wines and M/s.Nandini Wines on an allegation that they were indulging in filling the empty bottles of Officer's Choice whisky with Heavens Door Whisky by diluting the same. During the course of investigation in the said crime, the Station House Officer of Prohibition and Excise, Kanigiri, reported that on 08.07.2018 at about 5.00 p.m., A-8, A-9 and A-11 were arrested in the presence of mediators. A-11 is the licence holder of the petitioner shop. During the course of investigation in the said crime, the Station House Officer of Prohibition and Excise, Kanigiri, reported that on 08.07.2018 at about 5.00 p.m., A-8, A-9 and A-11 were arrested in the presence of mediators. A-11 is the licence holder of the petitioner shop. On interrogation, he is said to have admitted that he purchased liquor bottle caps (5000 numbers) with Officer's Choice brand from A-8 in the month of June 2018 and illegally used them in brand duping. Basing on the confession, it is reported that licencee has committed offence in the form of duping liquor with cheap brands and selling the same to consumers at higher brand prices which is dangerous to public health. Thus, the petitioner was also added as A-11. Pursuant thereto, a show-cause notice dated 09.07.2018 was issued and later the A4 licence of the petitioner was cancelled. Then, the petitioner has approached this Court vide W.P.No.39728 of 2018, seeking suspension of the orders issued vide proceedings Rc.No.121/2018/B1 dated 09.07.2018. On 13.11.2018 the said Writ Petition was disposed of directing the respondent authorities to consider the explanation of the petitioner dated 04.10.2018 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of one week from that day. 3. From the narration of the events, it is very clear that the case against the petitioner is based on his own confession and also basing on the confession of A-11 only. The confession of A-11, which has been extracted in the cancellation order, is to the effect that he purchased liquor bottle caps with Officer's Choice whisky brand from A-8 in the month of June 2018 and illegally used them for brand duping and sells them to consumer under the guise of Officer's Choice whisky. Therefore, the material, which has been made the basis to cancel the licence is the confessional statement of A-11 which was recorded while he was in the custody of the police. This by itself in my view cannot be made the basis to cancel the licence. 4. It is also to be noted here that the order does not indicate search of the shop of the petitioner and that no incriminating material was recovered from the shop of the petitioner. Basing on the crime registered and the confession made by the accused therein, the petitioner was arrested and he is alleged to have confessed about the brand duping. Basing on the crime registered and the confession made by the accused therein, the petitioner was arrested and he is alleged to have confessed about the brand duping. Therefore, except the confessions of the accused in the crime, there is no other material to connect the petitioner with the offence. In fact it is not even the case of the respondents that incriminating material relating to the offence was seized from the shop of the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court in Satyanna Goud and others vs. The Excise Superintendent, Mahabubnagar District and others (1994) 2 ALT 270 and judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.280 of 2018 dated 26.02.2018. 6. The Learned Government Pleader opposed the same basing on the instructions received from the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Markapuram. 7. It is to be noted that the law declared in Satyanna Goud (1 supra) is that "the license of an A-4 shop dealer should not be suspended based on the confessional statement of the person, in whose hands liquor bottles are seized; there must be some link between the A-4 shop dealer and the person from whom the bottles are seized; and there must be material on record to show that the bottles so seized were sold from the shop of the A-4 shop licensee whose license is sought to be suspended". 8. In the instant case even the instructions, which are placed on record reveal that except the confession of A-8, who claims to have supplied fake bottle caps to the shop of the petitioner, who in turn use the same in duping the liquor, there is no other material to connect the petitioner with the crime. Things would have been different had the officials seize some material from the shop of the petitioner, pursuant to the confession of A-8, which was not done in the instant case. Hence, the order passed by the third respondent in RC.121/2018/B1 dated 26.11.2018 can be set-aside. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the orders passed by the third respondent in RC.121/2018/B1 dated 26.11.2018. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.