Licence cancellation fails when a favourable second sample and criminal discharge undermine the excise allegation.

A toddy shop licence cancellation based on an alleged Abkari offence could not be sustained when the second chemical analysis was favourable to the licencee and the criminal court discharged the accused on that basis. The operative principle applied was that a punitive excise action loses its foundation once the underlying allegation is undermined by the unchallenged second sample result and corresponding criminal discharge. The administrative suspension-cum-cancellation was therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension-cum-cancellation of the toddy shop licence could be sustained when the second sample chemical analysis favoured the licencee and the criminal court discharged the accused on that basis.

Analysis: The licence was cancelled following a crime registered under Section 57(a) of the Abkari Act. The second sample sent for chemical analysis produced a result favourable to the licencee, and the Magistrate discharged the accused after observing that the crime could not be sustained in the light of the unchallenged second sample result. In view of the earlier decisions applied by the Court, the basis for continuing the suspension-cum-cancellation order did not survive.

Conclusion: The cancellation order could not be sustained and was set aside in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the foundation for a punitive excise action is undermined by a favourable second sample analysis and a corresponding criminal discharge, the administrative cancellation based on that allegation cannot be sustained.

---