The Kerala court recently dominated that intense alcohol associate degree exceedingly|in a very} personal place doesn't represent an offence as long as they are doing not cause any nuisance within the public. While quashing the continuing proceedings against the petitioner, Justice Sophy Thomas remarked: "Consuming liquor during a personal place while not inflicting nuisance or annoyance to anybody won't attract any offence. Mere smell of alcohol conjointly can't be construed to mean that the person was intoxicated or was underneath the influence of any liquor." The petitioner was engaged underneath Section 118(a) of the Kerala Police Act for allegedly showing underneath the influence of alcohol before a station house once known as to spot associate degree defendant. Advocates I.V. Pramod, K.V. Sasidharan and Saira Souraj showing for the petitioner argued that the petitioner may be a Village Assistant which he was known as to the Station at 7:00 p.m. Their case is that the cops registered the crime against him just as a result of he didn't establish the defendant, and alleged that it had been a false case foisted against him. On this ground, they hunted for the police blotter to be quashed. The Court noted that there was no proof to point out that the petitioner committed disorder or misbehaved himself within the station house. the sole allegation within the F.I.R was that he was intoxicated and was unable to regulate himself. The decide more ascertained that so as to draw in associate degree offence punishable underneath Section 118(a) of the KP Act, someone ought to be found associate degree exceedingly|in a very} public place in an intoxicated manner or disorder condition incapable of taking care of himself. "The actual fact that the petitioner reached the station house, once he was asked to be gift there, itself can negative the case of the prosecution that he was incapable of taking care of himself although it's taken for argument sake that he had consumed alcohol at that point." It was conjointly found that the word 'intoxicated' isn't outlined underneath the Act. to look at the that means of the word, the Court relied upon the Advanced Law lexicon: "The that means of the word 'intoxicated' as given in Advanced Law lexicon by P.Ramanatha Aiyar is that "a man is intoxicated whenever he's such a lot underneath the influence of alcoholic or intoxicating liquors that it therefore operates upon him, that it therefore affects his acts or conduct or movement, that the general public or parties coming back in touch with him may promptly see and understand that it had been touching him in this respect." The Court conjointly placed named the Blacks Law lexicon wherever intoxication was outlined to be a diminished ability to act with full mental and physical capabilities due to alcohol or drug consumption, or drunkenness. Accordingly, it had been found that although it's taken for argument sake that the petitioner had consumed alcohol, the accessible facts and materials don't seem to be decent to counsel that, he wasn't able to management himself or he committed disorder within the station house inflicting a nuisance. As such, the criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and therefore the proceedings unfinished before the petitioner before the Judicial official were quashed.