Supreme Court questions alcohol prohibition law, points to 5 'evils'
The Supreme Court of India questioned the efficacy of alcohol prohibition laws, citing five 'evils' including revenue loss, enforcement costs, corruption, illegal distilling, and drug menace. This critique came as the court quashed Maharashtra's rules restricting methanol sales, which were enacted after a 1991 hooch tragedy.
Why it matters
The Supreme Court's stance challenges long-standing prohibition policies in India, potentially influencing future legislative decisions on alcohol regulation and public health, and highlighting the unintended consequences of such bans.
NEW DELHI: Questioning the efficacy of prohibition, Supreme Court Friday pointed to five "evils" associated with the ban on liquor - revenue loss, money spent on its enforcement, corruption in police, illegal distilling, and result-ant drug menace - while also referring to a number of hooch tragedies in Gujarat and other states over the years.A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran said this while quashing Rules 18A and 18B of Maharashtra Poisons Rules restricting purchase of methanol and making it mandatory to add bitterant and colourant to it before selling to non-drug manufacturers. The rules were framed following the deaths of 93 people from spurious liquor containing methanol in Mumbai in 1991.While allowing the plea of various chemical manufacturing companies, including Indian Chemical Council, the bench dwelled upon the efficacy of the prohibition policy.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in