Mere Consumption Of Liquor At Flat Party Not An Offence: Madhya Pradesh High Court

“…Nowadays it is very common that youngsters organize get together and parties in a place where they could assemble and no restriction can be imposed upon them. It is indisputable that the party was going on in a flat owned by one of the petitioners, and the mere consumption of liquor cannot be deemed to be an offence”, the court remarked while quashing the FIR filed under Sections 34(1), 36(B), 36(C) of M.P. Excise Act, 1915 and under Sections 7/15 of Madhya Pradesh Kolahal Niyantran Adhiniam, 1985 and Section 177 of IPC.

The single judge bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi held that the prosecution has failed to place any concrete material or evidence on record that implicates the petitioners for the offences alleged to have been committed by them. After briefly noting the apex court decision in State of Haryana & others v. Bhajan Lal & others (1992), the High Court held that it was well within its power to quash the FIR as per the guidelines laid down by the apex court.

According to the prosecution, the accused petitioners were playing high-pitched DJ music and causing disturbance to the residents near Bhasin Arcade, Gorakhpur. Based on the information received, the police searched the apartment owned by one of the accused and found liquor bottles that were consumed by the youngsters. The police took immediate action against the accused only since they were under a legal obligation to do so upon a complaint being made by the residents about the inconvenience and disturbance caused by the petitioners, it was submitted by the state.

The senior counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that no permission is required for hosting private parties and playing music within the permissible sound limits. No offence has been made out against his clients based on the seizure made by the police from the spot and the contents of the FIR, even if the contents of the FIR were to be regarded as true. Moreover, the music was also being played within the permissible range and it was for the police to establish any contravention of Sections 7/15 of Madhya Pradesh Kolahal Niyantran Adhiniam, 1985. The counsel also contended that the mere seizure of 2 or 3 used liquor bottles does not constitute any offences as envisaged under the MP Excise Act.

According to the petitioners, the complaint was made under a false pretext by one of the neighbour residents in the building who was harbouring personal grudges against the owner of the apartment.

Senior Advocate Sanjay Agrawal and Advocate Anuj Agrawal appeared for the petitioners and Advocate Punit Shroti represented the state government

Case Title: Rajinder Singh Rajput & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Case No: Writ Petition No. 19198 of 2023