SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Raj) 134

SHRIMAL
Devi Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.D. Mantri, for Petitioner Devi Lal; N.M Kasliwa, for Petitioner Kishan Chand; G.G. Sharma, Addition Govt. Advocate

SHRIMAL, J. - Common questions of fact and law arise in these two writ petitions, as such they are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. Selling of intoxicants has always been considered as a business attended with danger to the community. To mitigate this evil the State in exercise of its police power have been regulating the business. The State possesses the right of complete control over all respects of intoxicants viz., manufacture, collection, sale and consumption. The reasons are obvious-public morality, public interest, harmful and dangerous effect on the edict, loss of hard earned money of the undiscerning and in provident common man and thereby lowering his standard of living, driving him into the cronic state of indebtedness and eventually disrupt the peace and happiness of his humble home.

3. The State having come to the conclusion that the consumption of intoxicating liquor was not in public interest, it enacted the Rajasthan Prohibition Act, 1969 (Act No. 17 of 1969) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Act received the assent of the President on September 18, 1969. The grant of leases and licenses for sale and manufacture of intoxicating liquor being the chief









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top