oppn parties Liquor Ban Dilution: A Face Saving Exercise

News Snippets

  • Centre asks states to give shelter and food to migrant workers to stop them from taking to the streets
  • RBI cuts repo rate by 75 bps, the steepest in 10 years
  • Centre writes to states regarding laxity in monitoring people who had arrived from abroad between January and March
  • Kerala reports a spurt in new cases
  • With 124 fresh cases on Friday, the number of reported cases in India stand at 854
  • Five of a family, including a 9-month-old-baby test positive for Covid-19 in Nadia district in West Bengal on Friday
  • The Pakistani army is reportedly forcibly moving all Covid-19 patients to PoK and Gilgit
  • Untimely azaans in J&K mosques spark panic gathering
  • Stocks rise - Sensex up by 1400 points and Nifty goes above the 8600 mark
  • Rahul Gandhi says the economic package is "the first step in the right direction"
  • The government announces wide-ranging measures to help the poor overcome the economic hardship caused by Covid-19
  • G20 leaders to hold a virtual meeting today to explore ways of fighting Covid-19 in a coordinated manner
  • The Delhi government orders testing of all medical staff after the positive test on a Delhi mohalla clinic doctor
  • As a fallout of a Delhi mohalla clinic doctor testing positive for Covid-19, 900 people in the chain quarantined
  • China offers help to India in the fight against Covid-19 and says India will win the battle at an early date
Death toll reaches 27 as Covid-19 cases across India reach 974 on Saturday
oppn parties
Liquor Ban Dilution: A Face Saving Exercise

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2017-07-14 06:12:21

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Writes for a number of publications.
The Supreme Court has done well to dilute its earlier order putting a blanket ban on liquor shops and bars within 500 metres on highways by exempting such businesses that lie within municipal limits, provided the highway stretches passing through municipal limits are de-notified and cease to be highways, thereby losing the perks associated with being one.

The earlier blanket ban order was passed without the court weighing all related issues and failing to prescribe rules that left loopholes that unscrupulous businessmen exploited to beat the ban. For instance, the court was aware that large stretches of highways passed through municipal limits. These stretches were prime real estate and a large number of luxury hotels were located on them in almost all cities and towns in India. These hotels had made enormous investments and were largely dependent on liquor to drive their F&B sales, which comprised a good percentage of their overall sales. Their patrons were mostly local residents and in-house guests and not those who drove past. Hence, it was highly unfair to put a ban on sale and consumption of liquor in these hotels. The initial order should have exempted these stretches with the same proviso that is now been ordered.

Further, by saying "within 500 metres" but not strictly prescribing how the distance was to be measured, the court left a loophole that was exploited by imaginative bar-owners bent on not losing custom. They created a maze of walkways on their entrance that made people walk for over 500 metres before they reached the bar counter, although the eatery was located right on the highway. That also made a mockery of the ban order. The court should prescribe rules to prevent this for effective implementation of the order.

If the real reason for the order is to prevent drunk driving – and hence accidents – on highways, one feels that the court has taken a wrong stand. For those who want to drink, 500 metres is not much of a distance to quench their thirst for alcohol, more so when they have wheels at their command. Drunk driving can only be prevented by corruption-free policing and stricter implementation of the MV Act.