SC orders closure of liquor shops along all highways

The apex court said that all current licenses to owners will expire from April 1 and no new licences will be ordered.

Written by Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | Updated: December 16, 2016 2:58 am
Liqour shop at Burail village in sector 45 of Chandigarh on Tuesday, March 15 2016. Express photo by Jasbir Malhi

The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered closure of all liquor shops along national and state highways across the country and directed governments to “cease and desist” from issuing excise licenses.

Expressing concern over nearly 1.5 lakh deaths every year in road mishaps, a bench led by Chief Justice of India T S Thakur said that no new liquor vend shall come up along the highways while those already having licences will have to shut shop by April 1, 2017.

The bench, also comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and L Nageswara Rao, clarified that those having licences to run such shops can operate till the expiry of their licences or April 1, whichever is earlier.

The police and municipal authorities, the court said, will make sure that all liquor vends are closed down permanently by the deadline. It also ordered removal of signages or boards indicating their location and held that no such vend can be allowed within a 100-m range of a highway.

The bench asked the chief secretaries and police chiefs of all state governments to chalk out a plan after a deliberation with excise and municipal authorities to ensure strict compliance with its directives.

It underlined that the directives were being issued in public interest since the lives of millions were at stake and that state governments had failed to come on board for a uniform policy to ban liquor vends along highways.

Reminding the state governments of their constitutional obligation to prohibit liquor sale, the bench said revenue generation cannot be the sole ground to let these vends continue along highways at the risk of giving rise to drunken driving and consequential fatalities.

The court was dealing with a clutch of petitions on the issue. NGO Arrive Safe Society had pressed for a complete ban. It had referred to a 2015 report of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and said almost five lakh accidents occurred last year in India, killing 1,46,000 people.

“An analysis of road accident data 2015 reveals that around 1,374 accidents and 400 deaths take place every day on Indian roads, resulting in 57 accidents and loss of 17 lives on an average every hour. India being a signatory to the Brasilia Declaration, it is imperative that policy guidelines are framed to control road accidents. Also, the excise policies of Indian states and Union Territories should be amended to conform to the spirit of Article 47 r/w Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the petition had said.

The court, in its order, also lent credence to a recommendation made by the Road Safety Committee, headed by its former judge K S Radhakrishnan, which had also recommended banning of all liquor vends along highways.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App now

  1. S
    Sandeep Singh
    Jan 15, 2017 at 4:05 am
    Is it applicable on hotel highway, because I have a liquor license of hotel.
    Reply
    1. H
      Hushang Vakil
      Mar 2, 2017 at 9:53 am
      The truckers are the ones mainly responsible for rash and drunken driving . Banning alcohol is a good thing ...But will it actually help in curbing the menace of drunken driving, that is yet to be seen. Because if they want to drink they will buy it in any case from the shops in the town and carry it with them or buy it from bootleggers who will now grow in numbers on the highway ...Knowing the excise Dept's lethargy , incompetence, and corruption to enforce the law.
      Reply
      1. S
        Sathyanarhan
        Jan 23, 2017 at 9:42 am
        Now all shops and bars are situated in commercial places.500 Mtrs. Inside means it's residential areas.It creates lot of problems..I feel supreme court is wrong as court can only define law not create..it's the duty of concerned legislative embly or parliament..The cause for this order is referred as Dunken driving..Is this order is in any way helps to avoid drunken driving? I feel no.For that strict highway checking andpunishment is necessary..transferring liquor shops away 500 mtrs. Is no use..
        Reply
        1. S
          Satish
          Feb 15, 2017 at 12:11 pm
          Strict action should be taken with the drunken driving people. Although to have blanket ban on Bars, Pubs situated idividually or in hotels on highway should have been excluded because these very hotels were build for the convenience of highway travellers. This is going to give rise to corruption.
          Reply
          1. N
            Nanjundappa
            Dec 15, 2016 at 5:53 am
            National anthem before closing or after closing. How about national anthem PRINTED labels on liquor bottles. And of course before every drink, stand up and sing the national Anthem.
            Reply
            1. K
              Krishna
              Dec 15, 2016 at 3:30 pm
              Though I like the dry law being imposed which is what I want.lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Does such a law already exist that is being requested to be implemented? If not, who gave SC the authority to create new law?lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;There will now be a mobile app to locate closest shops. SC is now encouraging distracted driving unless they also create a new law to ban mobile apps that help locate such shops. Shame on half thought out strategy by SC Bench.
              Reply
              1. K
                Krishna
                Dec 15, 2016 at 3:31 pm
                Wouldn't it be better to stop manufacturing instead of just banning its ?
                Reply
                1. B
                  B
                  Dec 15, 2016 at 7:38 am
                  Mallya will have heart attack
                  Reply
                  1. B
                    B
                    Dec 15, 2016 at 7:37 am
                    Now Mallya will fight this in court. Sure
                    Reply
                    1. S
                      Syed
                      Dec 15, 2016 at 10:18 am
                      Even 50% stop drinking because of complete will it not be beneficial
                      Reply
                      1. H
                        Haradhan Mandal
                        Dec 16, 2016 at 7:56 am
                        Then these (highways) will not remain HIGHways. Please call these some thing else - . Supreme Way?
                        Reply
                        1. K
                          Kalidas
                          Dec 15, 2016 at 5:50 am
                          Autocratic and no rationale. It also violates Art 19 of Fundamental Rights, which permits citizens of India to carry on trade freely in any part of India. The reasonable restrictions can not be applied here as closure of business amounts to "restrict the business" completely. The people spend lot of amount in setting up shop in good locations paying premium price and on furniture and fixtures. lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;If liquor production is allowed to manufacturers, why not permitting s? It is just natural extension of activity.lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Will Supreme Court pay the compensation to the owners for its latest order depriving someone of his livelihood which is his fundamental rights?
                          Reply
                          1. H
                            haroon
                            Dec 16, 2016 at 5:40 am
                            Supreme Court lt;br/gt;You are making mockery of the Judicial System
                            Reply
                            1. C
                              ChalapathiRao
                              Dec 15, 2016 at 6:02 am
                              I am afraid all MPs my be united on this issue to go against the ruling and p an act in parliament.
                              Reply
                              1. C
                                ChalapathiRao
                                Dec 15, 2016 at 6:00 am
                                Most of the accidents on highways are linked to drunk-driving. Hope this ruling helps. Over the years, govt's greed for money and revenues coupled with political corruption resulted in indiscriminate issue of licenses to liquor shops. The state govts are thriving on revenues from liquor . On one side the govts introduce schemes for below-poverty-line sections and on the other side the same govts rob the poor and bpl sections with liquor every-where.
                                Reply
                                1. A
                                  anil
                                  Dec 15, 2016 at 5:53 am
                                  Supreme Court orders closure of all liquor shops along national, state highwayslt;br/gt;The apex court said that all current licenses to owners will expire from April 1 and no new licences will be ordered.lt;br/gt;Great ! God is Great ,at last heard voice of heart , made Supreme Court to act in positive way in interest of Nation!! honored to be an Indianlt;br/gt;Now please remove Liquor shops from residential colonies , Public Bazars also
                                  Reply
                                  1. V
                                    Vikas
                                    Dec 15, 2016 at 8:39 am
                                    Bhaiyo,lt;br/gt;Pahle padh to lo kiya faisla liya hn dhyaan se padholt;br/gt;Highway and state highway par wine shop nahi hogi lekin thik usse 0.5 km means walikg distance and very very easily accessible so what is the mean of it if you think wine is not good or you want to control of usage of wine at the time of driving increase the penalty to 50,000 fine and 10 yrs suspended driving license and use that money to educate poor children but make sure checking team work without bribe and also make a core team to watch the action of checking team.
                                    Reply
                                    1. V
                                      Vikas
                                      Dec 15, 2016 at 8:42 am
                                      they restricted only 500 meter radius means only half kilometer. LOL
                                      Reply
                                      1. A
                                        avi
                                        Dec 15, 2016 at 6:07 am
                                        While it can be debated, it will certainly reduce drunken long distance truck drivers.
                                        Reply
                                        1. B
                                          Ballu
                                          Dec 15, 2016 at 5:57 am
                                          Lets see if this is going to happen.. 99% chances barons will get it cancelled..
                                          Reply
                                          1. K
                                            Kaliyug
                                            Dec 16, 2016 at 2:19 am
                                            Most of the profitable liquor stores are owned by the politician and his family, they make the local police happy by letting them eat the bribes in their corridor. The Supreme court can give good advice, it is not carried out by the police.
                                            Reply
                                            1. Load More Comments