Kerala High Court stays 'dry day' order at Kerala–TN border ahead of Tamil Nadu polls

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday stayed a State government order imposing 'dry days' in areas within 5 kilometres of the Kerala-Tamil Nadu border ahead of the Tamil Nadu Assembly elections scheduled for April 23, 2026 [James v State of Kerala & ors].

A Vacation Bench of Justice S Manu observed that the State's order was issued without any authority of law and could not be justified.

The Court noted that Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (prohibition of liquor sale during elections) contemplated restrictions on the sale of liquor only within polling areas. On the other hand, the State government's order extended this prohibition to parts of Kerala which were not within polling areas.

It observed that even if the Chief Electoral Officers of Kerala and Tamil Nadu had requested such a temporary liquor ban, the government did not appear to have the statutory backing or authority to impose such a restriction.

"This Court is of the view that no provision under the Abkari Act or the Representation of the People Act justifies the issuance of an order prohibiting sale of liquor in the State of Kerala in view of the general elections in the State of Tamil Nadu...In view of the Press Note issued by the Election Commission of India, what the State government has done is beyond what is required by the ECI ... I, therefore, direct that the operation of the impugned order shall stand stayed," the Court ordered.

The Court passed the order on a plea challenging the Kerala government's declaration of 'dry days' from April 21, 2026 (10 AM) to April 23, 2026 (midnight) and again on May 4 (counting day), in areas falling within a 5 kilometre radius of the Kerala-TN border.

The petition was filed by a bar licence holder, who runs a hotel at Kumily in Kerala's Idukki district. He contended that his establishment, though within the notified radius, had no connections with polling activity in Tamil Nadu. He, therefore, questioned the temporary liquor ban imposed there.

The petitioner's counsel called the government's order arbitrary and violative of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Indian Constitution, as neither the Kerala Abkari Act nor the Representation of Peoples Act empowered the State to issue such an order imposing restrictions beyond poling areas.

The Court, too, expressed doubts over the authority of the State government to impose such a restriction.

"There must be some source of power for the government to issue an order of this nature. What is the source of power? There must be some source of power, either under the Foreign Liquor Rules or the Abkari Act. See this order opens with the statement, that Chief Electoral Officers of Tamil Nadu and Kerala have made a request. How can they make such a request? They can make a request only within the statutory powers exercised by them, available to them," the judge observed today.

The Election Commission's counsel justified the State government's order by arguing that sale of liquor in border areas of Kerala could adversely affect polling in Tamil Nadu.

He had also referred to Section 54 of the Abkari Act (power to close liquor shops to maintain public peace) to justify the government's order, adding that the Election Commission had residuary powers to ensure free and fair elections.

However, the Court rejected these arguments, noting that the powers under Section 54 of the Kerala Abkari Act were vested in the district magistrate, whereas the impugned order was issued by the Additional Chief Secretary of the government.

The Court found that there was no statutory provision that supported the State's dry day order, and proceeded to stay its operation.

[Live Coverage]