Supreme Court Seeks Central Government's Response On Petition Seeking Age Verification At Liquor Stores

The Supreme Court today issued notice to the Union Government on a petition seeking directions to implement an age-verification mechanism at liquor shops to curb underage drinking.

The Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation Petition filed by Community Against Drunken Driving, a non-governmental organisation working to prevent alcohol-related incidents. Its petition says that though the sale and consumption of alcohol is regulated by states based on age, a mechanism to check the age of consumers is absent.

The practice of underage drinking is “very rampant” and that there is no deterrence, Senior Advocate P.B. Suresh, appearing for the organisation alongside Advocate Vipin Nair, told the Bench. "Any 15 or 16 year old can walk in and buy alcohol and no person takes in the details (of the person buying)", P.B. Suresh said.

Justice B.R. Gavai, responding to the submission, asked, “Suppose if it is purchased in somebody else’s name?” To this, Justice K.V. Vishwanathan cleverly added, “(For instance) if a servant is sent to purchase.”

While the petitioner had arrayed all states and Union Territories, the two-Judge Bench only issued notice to the Union Government, returnable in three weeks.

P.B. Suresh argued that a policy on checking the age of consumers would help in reducing underage drinking and claimed that it could reduce drunken driving. He argued that in places where the legal drinking age is lower, the crime is higher, but he added that he was not challenging the specific age limits prevalent in each state, since that is a state subject. He also noted that some states now allow doorstep delivery of alcohol.

Justice Gavai then said, “Door delivery first started in Bihar because of the prohibition.” On this, Suresh joked, "Wherever prohibition is imposed, they don’t call it a dry state, they call it a try state, because if you try, you can get it."

Justice Vishwanathan noted another trend in relation to alcohol, about people residing in the border areas of states where liquor is prohibited going to neighbouring states to buy it. People from Gujarat visit Rajasthan and Maharashtra, Justice Gavai noted, adding, “I am told that in Nathdwara (in Rajasthan), the number of people who go for pilgrimage is less than those who go for this pilgrimage.” Justice Vishwanathan called this a kind of "world tour".

Cause Title: Community Against Drunken Driving v. Union of India [Diary 29463-2024 PIL-W]