Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : KOKA RAGHAVA RAO
Kanaka Durga Wines, Visakhapatnam - Appellant
Versus
Government Of A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 04-21-95
The Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (Act 17 of 1995) was challenged on the grounds that it violated Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners argued that the definition of "liquor" in the Act was discriminatory and violative of Article 14, and that the Act was not protected under Article 31-C of the Constitution because it was not enacted to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. The petitioners also argued that the Act violated their fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19 of the Constitution. The Court held that the definition of "liquor" in the Act was not violative of Article 14, as it was based on an intelligible differentia and had a rational nexus with the object of the Act, which was to impose total prohibition in a phased manner. The Court also held that the Act was protected under Article 31-C, as it was enacted to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. Finally, the Court held that the Act did not violate the petitioners' fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19, as there is no fundamental right to trade or carry on business in intoxicating liquor or beverages.
Fact of the Case:
The Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (Act 17 of 1995) was challenged on the grounds that it violated Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners argued that the definition of "liquor" in the Act was discriminatory and violative of Article 14, and that the Act was not protected under Article 31-C of the Constitution because it was not enacted to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. The petitioners also argued that the Act violated their fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19 of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the definition of "liquor" in the Act was not violative of Article 14, as it was based on an intelligible differentia and had a rational nexus with the object of the Act, which was to impose total prohibition in a phased manner. The Court also held that the Act was protected under Article 31-C, as it was enacted to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. Finally, the Court held that the Act did not violate the petitioners' fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19, as there is no fundamental right to trade or carry on business in intoxicating liquor or beverages.
Issues: 1. Whether the definition of "liquor" in the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (Act 17 of 1995) was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the Act was protected under Article 31-C of the Constitution? 3. Whether the Act violated the petitioners' fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19 of the Constitution?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The definition of "liquor" in the Act was not violative of Article 14, as it was based on an intelligible differentia and had a rational nexus with the object of the Act, which was to impose total prohibition in a phased manner. 2. The Act was protected under Article 31-C, as it was enacted to give effect to the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution. 3. The Act did not violate the petitioners' fundamental right to consume intoxicating drinks of their choice under Article 19, as there is no fundamental right to trade or carry on business in intoxicating liquor or beverages.
Final Decision: The Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (Act 17 of 1995).
( 1 ) INTOXICATING drinks, a much desired beverage, a favourite topic of poetry in oriental countries, a routine drink and indispensable item of parties and dinners in occidental countries, have nonetheless been subject of controversy from time immemorial. Their virtues and vices have been debated by the addicts and the reformists for ages. Some religions prohibited their use on the ground of their predominantly delirious effects which outweigh the pleasure, enjoyment and benefits, if any, of the drinks. Though the petitioners have placed some material on record to show that all intoxicating drinks are not injurious to health and that some drinks like beer, draught beer have good nutrition value and that some others, if taken in small quantities, not only have no delirious effect but also have many advantages and the State relied on some literature to show that intoxicating drinks are injurious to health, we are not inclined to discuss these aspects inasmuch as our constitutional framers imposed a duty on every State to endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of the intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health as one of the Directive Principles of the State Policy by including it in article 47 (Part-IV) of the Constitution of India.
( 2 ) IN the composite State of Madras an attempt was made to bring about the prohibition of the consumption of intoxicating drinks by enacting the Madras prohibition Act, 1937 (Madras Actx of 1937 ). The Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (Act XXV of 1949) was another attempt in the pre-constitutionalera to introduce prohibition but that attempt also was not successful. In discharge of that constitutional mandate many States implemented the policy of prohibition by banning consumption of intoxicating drinks. We learn, there is total prohibition in the States of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Delhi and partial prohibition in the States of tamilnadu and Uttar Pradesh. In our State the manufacture, sale and consumption of intoxicating liquors were prohibited by making the Andhra pradesh (Andhra Area) Prohibition Act, 1937 applicable to the erstwhile State of Andhra By Andhra Adaptation Act, 1953. Later, after formation of Andhra pradesh, that Act was applicable only to the Andhra area of the State. But in the whole State the production, manufacture, possession, transport, purchase and sale of intoxicating liquor are regulated by the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968, hereinafter referred to as the Excise Act . Licences were granted for manufacture of liquor and for sale; however, no permit was required for consumption of intoxicating drinks under the Excise Act.
( 3 ) THERE was an unprecedented agitation, commonly known as the antiarrack agitation by the women of this State, which started from Nellore District, demanding that the Government should impose ban on the manufacture, sale and consumption of intoxicating liquors. Their agitation resulted in the then government constituting a Cabinet Sub-Committee in G. O. Rt. 4362, G. A. D. , dated 12-10-1992, which may be regarded as the first step in implementing the prohibition policy, inter alia, to analyse the reasons for the said agitation and to outline the steps that can be taken to meet the demands. On receipt of the report of the Sub-Committee dated November 27, 1992, the Government decided that its ultimate objective would be to have total prohibition and issued orders indicating the future course of action in G. O. Ms. No. 402, Revenue (Excise-II) department, dated April 24, 1993.
( 4 ) IN the last State Assembly elections, held in December, 1994, the Telugu desam Party included in its election manifesto the policy of total prohibition. Having received the mandate of the electorate and after forming the government it embarked on giving effect to the prohibition policy. First, on december 12, 1994 the Government issued notices to all the retailers, under section 32 of the Excise
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
