Right to privacy not like a bull in a china shop, says Gujarat government on petitions challenging Prohibition Act

On June 23, the Gujarat High Court’s division bench consisting of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav reserved its order on the maintainability of petitions that challenge Prohibition Act’s provisions as contrary to the constitutional rights of privacy, life and personal liberty.

The order was reserved after Advocate General Kamal Trivedi argued that the court is not permitted to examine the validity of any law or any new or law or additional grounds when the Supreme Court has upheld it in the past. The apex court had upheld the Prohibition Act, 1949 in its judgement in the year 1951.

He continued that a law which has been made valid by the apex court today, can be held invalid tomorrow, “but for that purpose, the forum is the Supreme Court and not this court.”

The Advocate argued, “The concept of right to privacy is not like a bull in a china shop. It is subject to reasonable restrictions based on social environment.” He added that the right to consume non-vegetarian food within the four walls of a person’s home is incomparable to the right to consume alcohol which can prove to be injurious to health and be stopped.

“Otherwise tomorrow somebody will say you should not harass me if I am taking drug, psychotropic substances within my four walls,” Trivedi said.

In his submission, Additional Advocate General Prakash Jani stated that the “people of Gujarat are extremely happy with the prohibition law.”

Petitions have challenged the validity of the law under Constitution of the various sections of the Act like section 12 and 13 which contains total prohibition on manufacture, purchase, import, transportation, export, sale, possession, use and consumption of liquor and sought them to be declared as Ultra Vires.