Liquor ban: Bihar govt seeks transfer of cases from Patna High Court

The Bihar government on Monday moved the Supreme Court seeking transfer of all the matters relating to its law banning sale and consumption of all types of liquor, which are pending before the Patna High Court to the apex court.

PTI November 21, 2016 18:02:37 IST
Liquor ban: Bihar govt seeks transfer of cases from Patna High Court

New Delhi: The Bihar government on Monday moved the Supreme Court seeking transfer of all the matters relating to its law banning sale and consumption of all types of liquor, which are pending before the Patna High Court to the apex court.

A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy asked senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, who was appearing for the state, to move a proper transfer petition in this regard.

Liquor ban Bihar govt seeks transfer of cases from Patna High Court

Representational image. Reuters

Dhavan, assisted by advocate Keshav Mohan, told the bench that the apex court had on 7 October stayed the operation of Patna High Court's judgement quashing the law banning sale and consumption of all types of liquor in the state and a number of petitions related to the matter were pending before the high court.

"A number of cases have been filed and they are pending before the high court. Let all the matters be transferred to the Supreme Court," he said.

To this, the bench said, "You must file a proper transfer petition."

The court told Dhavan that the state government could mention the matter before the bench after filing the transfer petition. The bench had earlier issued notice to all respondents including some liquor manufacturers on whose plea the high court had held as illegal and unconstitutional the Bihar government's prohibition law.

The state government has challenged the high court verdict of 30 September quashing the notification banning consumption and sale of liquor in the state, saying it was ultra vires to the Constitution. However, after the law was set aside by the high court, the Nitish Kumar government had came out with a new law banning sale and consumption of liquor, which was notified on Gandhi Jayanti day on 2 October.

The Bihar government in its petition had urged the apex court to stay the high court order which had quashed the 5 April notification to ban liquor. It had notified the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
to ensure that the ban on sale and consumption of alcohol including Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) as well spiced and domestic liquor, continued in the state.

The high court order was passed on a batch of petitions filed by the Liquor Trade Association and others, challenging the liquor law brought in with stringent penal provisions.

Soon thereafter, the state government brought in the new law banning liquor, including harsher provisions like arrest of all adults in a house where contraband was found.

The Grand Secular Alliance government in Bihar had first banned manufacture, trade, sale and consumption of country-made liquor since 1 April, but later imposed a blanket ban on all types of liquor, including foreign liquor, in the state.

Updated Date:

also read

NEET SS 2021: Centre defends change in exam pattern in SC, postpones test date to January 2022
India

NEET SS 2021: Centre defends change in exam pattern in SC, postpones test date to January 2022

The government defended its decision to alter the paper pattern of the NEET SS 2021 exam, saying that the changes were made to ensure that seats do not go unfulfilled

Lakhimpur Kheri: SC takes suo motu cognisance, CJI-led bench to hear matter today
India

Lakhimpur Kheri: SC takes suo motu cognisance, CJI-led bench to hear matter today

As per the cause list uploaded on the apex court website, a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli would hear the matter.

Supreme Court says reprimanding students for indiscipline not tantamount to provocation for suicide
India

Supreme Court says reprimanding students for indiscipline not tantamount to provocation for suicide

The top court said it is a solemn duty of a teacher to instill discipline and reprimanding a student for not being attentive, up to the mark in studies, bunking classes or not attending the school is not uncommon