Brethren hall a ‘church’: Kerala High Court rejects appeal to operate liquor bar nearby

Bar proposed nearby

The dispute dates back to 2008, when the Town Brethren Assembly learnt that the hotel was proposing to start a bar hotel in a building about 80 metres from its assembly hall. The group approached the excise authorities, contending that a bar at that distance would violate the applicable rules.

The excise commissioner, on December 7, 2008, held that the Brethren Assembly Hall fell within the definition of a church and rejected the hotel’s licence application. The hotel then moved a revision plea.

Justices K Natarajan and Johnson John noted that the hotel did not dispute that the Brethren Assembly was a Christian religious congregation.

Rule 13(3) defines a “church” as a public place where Christians offer prayers. It also sets distance limits for certain hotels located near places such as churches, temples, mosques, educational institutions and burial grounds.

The prescribed distance is 200 metres for three-star hotels and 50 metres for four-star, five-star, five-star deluxe and specified heritage hotels. The judgment did not determine the hotel’s specific licence entitlement or classification.

‘Not a public place’

The hotel argued that the assembly hall was not a public place. It said the hall was used for various purposes by the Brethren mission and was not an exclusive place of religious worship.

It also relied on the Assembly’s statement that anyone following the Christian faith could attend worship and prayers, while participation in the holy sacrament was restricted to those following Brethren beliefs. The hotel argued that the material on record was insufficient to establish that the hall was a public place under the rule.

The high court noted that the hotel did not dispute that the Brethren Assembly was a Christian religious congregation or that prayers were offered at the hall. Worship, Sunday school, Bible study and separate prayer meetings for women and men were also held there.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Gaurav Jain vs Union of India, the court noted that a place need not be public property to qualify as a public place.

“Even if it is a private property, it is sufficient that the place is accessible to the public,” the court said. It further said that the legal definition had to be read as a whole, with the words “where prayer is offered by Christians” qualifying “public place”.

Other liquor outlets

The hotel pointed to another bar hotel functioning within 200 metres of the assembly hall and a toddy shop within 400 metres, arguing that the assembly had not objected to them.

To this, the high court said that their existence was not relevant to deciding whether the Brethren Assembly Hall was a church. “The appellants cannot base their claim for licence on the ground of parity by taking such a contention,” it said.

The court said the purpose of the distance rule was “to keep away bar hotels from certain places so as to avoid disturbance to religious prayers and educational institutions.”

Not necessary to establish ownership: HC

The hotel also argued that the Town Brethren Assembly was not a registered society and had not produced its bye-laws or constitution, and therefore lacked locus standi to maintain the writ petition.

The court noted that its earlier 2023 division bench judgment had directed the single judge to decide whether the hall was a church under Rule 13(3). Since that judgment was not challenged and had attained finality, the court said it was not necessary to establish the Assembly’s ownership, possession or administrative structure to decide the issue.

“The only question is whether the assembly hall is a public place where prayer is offered by Christians,” the court said. It added that there was satisfactory material to conclude that the hall was a public place where prayers were offered by Christians belonging to the Brethren denomination.