The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court's direction to renew the liquor licence of a Som Distilleries group company, dismissing the State government's challenge to that extent, The Bar Bulletin reported. A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana passed the order in the State of Madhya Pradesh's special leave petitions against the High Court judgment.

Source: The Bar Bulletin

The court, however, set aside the parts of the High Court's ruling that had permitted the company to claim damages, costs and losses from the State for alleged mala fide action, imposed costs of Rs 1 lakh — yaani one lakh rupees — on the State, and made adverse observations concerning the office of the Advocate General, The Bar Bulletin reported. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the State, while Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi represented the distillery.

Source: The Bar Bulletin

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in its judgment dated September 24, 2026, had quashed the June 18, 2026 order rejecting the company's excise licence renewal applications and directed renewal of all its manufacturing licences under the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act within 15 days, according to the company's regulatory disclosure summarised by ScoutQuest. The High Court had awarded Rs 1 lakh in costs payable by the Madhya Pradesh government and preserved the company's right to pursue damages and losses from the period of operational closure — the parts the Supreme Court has now set aside.

Source: ScoutQuest (company disclosure)

The case traces back to a 2011 incident in which a truck carrying around 1,200 boxes of Bluechip whisky was intercepted in Madhya Pradesh for allegedly being transported on forged permits, The Bar Bulletin reported. Following criminal proceedings against individuals associated with Som Distilleries, the State suspended eight excise licences held by Som Distilleries Pvt Ltd and Som Distilleries and Breweries Pvt Ltd in February 2026, and the High Court later criticised the Excise Commissioner's action as mala fide — criticism the Supreme Court's order now removes along with the remarks about legal advice from the Advocate General's office.

Source: The Bar Bulletin