Allahabad HC turns down PIL seeking policy for online sale, home delivery of liquor in UP

PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad high court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking framing of a policy to permit online sale of liquor and its home delivery in Uttar Pradesh.
Dismissing the PIL filed by Gopal Krishna Pandey, a high court lawyer, a division bench comprising Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice Subhash Chandra Sharma observed: “Finding the subject matter as the policy of the state, we are not inclined to allow online sale of liquor.”
The PIL was filed seeking direction for framing necessary policy for home delivery of liquor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain state governments have issued notification to allow the delivery of liquor online and thereby home delivery would be made. It was in pursuance of the observations made by the Supreme Court to the states to consider non-direct sale, including online/home delivery of liquor to avoid overcrowding and to maintain social distancing norms in terms of Covid-19 guidelines. It is submitted that Madras high court has permitted online sale of liquor.
The chief standing counsel, representing the state government, opposed the petition and submitted that the prayer made is in reference to the policy decision and presently the government is not inclined to allow online sale of the liquor with home delivery. The permission to sell liquor online by a few states was in the era of Covid-19 when it was at its peak and was to avoid overcrowding in the shops. There is nothing on record to show overcrowding on the shops in the state of Uttar Pradesh and now the peak of Covid-19 and its second phase has gone.
In the PIL, several reasons to allow sale were given like if liquor is sold online, the sale would also increase and the increase in sale means increase of revenue. Secondly, the difficulty in deciding location of shops as per Uttar Pradesh number and location of excise shop rules, 1968 would be removed. Besides, there will be low cost of maintenance of shops.
Further, senior citizens or other persons, who for any reason best known to them avoid counter purchase from the shops, would also be facilitated. In addition to the above, unnecessary and unsocial crowds usually collected around the liquor shops would also be reduced, as a result of which the law and order would also improve.
Rejecting all pleas, the court in its order on August 4 said, “The petitioner has shown concern to increase the revenue of the state and other aspects which includes purchase of liquor even by those who may be shy in making purchases from the shop. The reasons given are not to avoid overcrowding or to maintain social distancing to follow the Covid-19 protocol, rather it is for different reasons observed by the apex court.”