SC upholds Kerala govt's liquor policy

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the liquor policy of the Kerala government allowing bars only in five-star hotels. It is estimated that around 400 bars would have to be shut down after this judgment. It will benefit 24 five-star hotels in the state.

Last year, the Kerala High Court had upheld the government's decision to close down around 700 bars, after exempting heritage and four-star hotels. The Kerala Bar Owners Association representing three and four-star hotels and individual traders had moved the SC against the judgment alleging that it was discriminatory.

A Bench of judges Vikramjit Sen and Shiva Kirti Singh accepted the state's argument that it has the power to impose even "unreasonable restrictions" on liquor trade to improve public health. The judges also ruled that liquor traders had no right to challenge the policy. Five-star hotels were granted exemption as tourists from all over the world visit the state.

The state government had argued that the policy was adopted with the aim of reducing alcohol consumption by stages bringing in total prohibition by 2023. The government implemented the policy following protests against alcoholism by non-government agencies, women and religious groups.

Kapil Sibal, representing the government, had submitted that people did not come to the state only to drink liquor, but mainly to enjoy the beauty of nature.

Attorney General Mukul Rohtagi argued on behalf of liquor traders and against the Congress-led state government.

There was severe criticism against his taking up the anti-government brief in a liquor matter. A petition against him was dismissed by the Supreme Court.

Along with senior advocate Harish Salve, the Attorney General argued that exempting five-star hotel bars and denying the same benefit to others reeked of discrimination. It was also violation of the right to trade guaranteed under the Constitution. However, judge Sen, who retires on Wednesday, broke his holiday in view of his retirement on Wednesday and wrote a common judgment rejecting all contentions of the bar owners.