High Court argues on Gujarat prohibition law petitioners: State can’t dictate what we eat, drink

On Wednesday, the Gujarat High Court reserved its order to maintain the petitions that were challenging the State’s Prohibition Act which is in opposition to the citizen’s rights to privacy, life, and personal liberty as sanctified in the Constitution.

Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav are in charge of the division bench and have reserved their order as the petitions challenge the provisions of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949. Prior to this, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi contended that “It is not permissible for the court to examine the validity of any law or any new or law or additional grounds when it has been upheld by the apex court in the past”.

In addition to that, the Advocate General also argued that the concept of the right to privacy is unlike a “bull in a china shop” and that it should be subjected to restrictions that are reasonable and on the basis of one’s social environment.

The people who petitioned against it had a different reasoning. They argued that such matters should be taken according to merits and the provisions that they challenged in their pleas were materially different from what they were seven decades ago in 1951.

In addition to that, the petitioners  put up a case that the provisions that are present today are “arbitrary, irrational, unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory.” and that even though liquor is not sold legally, it is still procurable through “underground network of bootleggers, organized criminal gangs and corrupt officials.”

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Privacy & Cookies Policy