A former NHS manager turned off licence owner says his shop won't cause harm in an area plagued by street drinkers and anti social behaviour.

Jugdutt Ramparsad appeared before Medway council's licencing committee today, where he said his former professional credentials meant he was well able to run a small business and act responsibly when serving alcohol.

Last year the shop had its licence revoked after Mr Ramparsad's son Udish was found with 87 packages of cannabis on the premises, and was jailed for eight months in March after pleading guilty to possessing cannabis with intent to supply and possessing a knife in a public place.

But now Jugdutt, a former NHS manager, has been granted permission to sell alcohol on the premises again - as long as Udish is not on site during opening hours.

"My job is to save lives, I'm not here to kill people," Mr Ramparsad told Medway's licencing panel this week. "If someone was not in a good mental state I would never sell them alcohol."

He said his previous job had involved psychiatric training and involved training nurses, but would not go into further detail when quizzed by the Messenger after the hearing.

Speaking during the hearing, Mr Ramparsad said he had invested a lot of the money in the business for his son, adding: "I'm very sorry this has happened, everybody makes mistakes."

His solicitor David Dadds dismissed submissions by the police, Medway's public health project coordinator Barbara Murray, and ward councillor Andrew Mackness about the impact of street drinking in the area - which was said to be fueling anti social behaviour and public health problems.

Cllr Macknesss wrote to the bench saying residents were continually disturbed by the noise from street drinkers and that it had been reported that people were frightened by their behaviour.

Human faeces had been found in doorways, litter was a nuisance, and the ward - River Ward - had more instances of "alcohol related harms" than any other war in Medway between 2010 and 2015.

But Mr Dadds said the evidence offered on the potential harm to public health had been "woefully inadequate"; and urged councillors not to put any weight on "generic" evidence offered on the harm of street drinking.

There had been no proper evidence offered on the cumulative impact of off licences in the area, he asserted, while the premises had successfully operated in accordance with the licence before the unrelated criminal matters connected with Mr Ramparsad's son last year.

Mr Ramparsad himself was a man of good character, he said, and would never for example serve alcohol to children.

"You have to look at the real evidence," he added. "This premises has operated in the past without causing difficulty in relation to street drinking."

He pointed to steps taken at nearby Premier Food, where police had asked the owners to not sell beers and ciders stronger than 6% ABV, and not sell more than four cans at a time.

"If it can work there it can work here," he said.

The bench agreed, granting the licence with the condition suggested, along with several more, including that Udish Ramparsad should not have any involvement in the business and be excluded from the premises while its open to the public.