18 December 2018 Small Business >> Business & Commercial Law   |   Consumer Law >> Civil & Consumer Law  

A shop owner in Prakasam District, India, has successfully challenged the cancellation of his liquor license. The court ruled that relying solely on a confession, especially one made in police custody, was insufficient grounds for such a harsh penalty.

M/s. TNR Wines, a shop selling alcoholic beverages, faced license cancellation after the owner, A-11, reportedly confessed to purchasing fake caps for a popular brand (Officer's Choice) and using them to dupe customers with cheaper liquor. However, the owner contested this decision.

The crux of the argument hinged on the lack of concrete evidence. While A-11 admitted to buying the caps, no duped liquor or fake caps were found during a search of the shop. The petitioner further argued that confessions made under police custody are often unreliable and should not be the sole basis for such a serious consequence.

The court sided with the petitioner. The judge acknowledged previous rulings requiring a clear link between seized items and the shop's license holder. In this case, the confession, without any physical evidence from the shop itself, was deemed insufficient.

The court ultimately allowed the writ petition and reinstated the shop's liquor license. This case highlights the importance of corroborating confessions with concrete evidence, especially when significant penalties are involved.