Chennai: Madras High Court made a powerful comment while hearing a case. The judges also quoted the great Tamil poet Thiruvalluvar and Mahatma Gandhi in their remarks. In fact, Madras High Court issued an order canceling the FIR registered against the villagers who were peacefully protesting against the liquor shop, which caught the attention of the entire country. In its decision the court also mentioned the ill effects of alcohol. The court said in its comment, ‘Those who drink alcohol, ruin themselves and their people.’
In the decision, the High Court clearly said that the villagers opposed the government TASMAC liquor shop present in the area because it was causing problems to women, children and residential areas. In such a situation, the FIR registered by terming peaceful protest as a crime was not justified. This stand of the court has once again given a new direction to the debate on prohibition, public inconvenience and civil rights.
What is the whole matter?
In February 2025, local people demonstrated in front of the TASMAC shop in Ramanathapuram district. This protest was done without permission. Based on this, on the complaint of VAO, the police registered an FIR against 10 villagers and other people. In the FIR, charges were made under sections 126(2), 189(2), 192, 292 and 132 of BNS. It was alleged that the protesters did things like inappropriate crowding, civil inconvenience and stopping the officer from duty.
The petitioners told the court that this protest was completely peaceful and they had only demanded that the liquor shop running in the middle of the residential areas should be removed.
Why did the court mention Thiruvalluvar and Gandhi?
Justice B. In his order, Pugalendhi made detailed comments on the social and mental harm caused by alcohol. He said-
mention of thiruvalluvar
“Just as a sleeping person is as if he is dead, a person under the influence of alcohol is as if he has consumed poison.”
“When a mother forgives her son’s mistakes, she also cannot bear to see him drunk.”
mention of gandhi
“Alcohol takes a man away from himself. Those who drink destroy themselves and their people.”
The court believed that if everyone from thousands of years old literature to independence leaders had been warning about the social ill effects of alcohol, then this protest by the villagers was not only justified but also related to public interest.
After all, what was the protest about?
The main argument of the villagers was that-
- TASMAC shop is in a densely populated area.
- This creates security problems for women and children.
- Difficult for people to move around at night.
- Incidents of creating ruckus after drinking alcohol are common.
- Bad effect on school going children.
The petitioners said that demanding removal of the shop is a civil right, not a crime. Advocate P. Kottachami, representing the government in opposition, said that the protesters demonstrated without permission and affected public order.
Why did the court cancel the FIR?
The court enumerated four important points-
Main basis of decision
- Peaceful protest is a democratic right.
- There is no evidence of disruption of public order due to the demonstration.
- The petitioners did not attack any government official.
- The purpose of the FIR seems to be “to put pressure on those who express dissatisfaction”.
- The allegations of inconvenience caused by the liquor shop are genuine and related to community interest.
The court said that the administration should listen to the concerns of the common people and not treat them like criminals.
importance of decision
This decision is not just about canceling an FIR, but gives new light to the judiciary’s approach on liquor policy, civil rights and public order. There has been a debate going on for a long time regarding TASMAC shops in South India. Villagers have repeatedly raised issues like addiction, crime and domestic violence. For the first time, the court mentioned Thiruvalluvar and Gandhi while giving moral and historical basis to this type of protest.
