Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Insofar as the first contention of the petitioner is concerned, the proviso to Rule 8(1) of the 2003 Rules is not attracted in the present case at all.

10. Since it is an admitted position and also reflected from the order and the enquiry report that there was no zebra crossing in the vicinity, the said proviso cannot have any application. The proviso merely provides that if a road has to be crossed along the path which an ordinary prudent person normally takes to reach such new sites and the said road is marked by zebra crossing for pedestrians to cross, the said distance shall be measured taking into account the fact that an ordinary prudent person, while walking, would have crossed the said road at the point marked by zebra crossing for pedestrians to cross.

11. It is rather obvious that if there is no zebra crossing, there is no question of a prudent person crossing a zebra crossing. As such, it is absurd that the said proviso should be looked into while passing the impugned order.

12. Insofar as the second ground is concerned, the existing liquor shops cannot have any manner of relevance in the present context, since admittedly those shops are situated within a radius of one kilometer which is more than the restricted area of 1000 feet.