9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... larly, the sale of liquor should be from a point which is neither visible from a national or state highway or which is directly accessible from a national or state highway. However, in such a situation, the prohibited distance should in our view be restricted to 220 metres from the outer edge of the national or state highway or of a service lane along the highway. We accordingly direct that the following paragraph shall be inserted, after direction (v) in paragraph 24 of the operative directions of this Court in the judgment dated 15 December 2016 namely : “In the case of areas comprised in local bodies with a population of 20,000 people or less, the distance of 500 metres shall stand reduced to 220 metres”. The second area upon which we propose to issue a relaxation is in respect of direction (iii) contained in paragraph 24 of the judgment of this Court. This Court has directed that existing licences which have been renewed prior to the date of the order shall continue only until the term of the licence expires but not later than 1 April 2017. This was on the basis that the excise year ends on 31 March with the end of the financial year. This Court has been apprised during t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Meghalaya and Sikkim are concerned, it would suffice if the two states are exempted only from the application of the 500 metre distance requirement provided in paragraph 24(v)(iii) of the judgment of this Court on 15 December 2016. Insofar as the State of Himachal Pradesh is concerned, we are of the view that the exemption which has been granted earlier in respect of areas falling under local bodies with a population of 20,000 will sufficiently protect the interests of the State. No further relaxation is granted over and above what has already been stated in that regard. - I A Nos 4-6, 7-9, 10-12, 13-15, 16-18, 19-21, 22-24, 25-27, 28-30, 31-33, 34-36, 37-39, 40-42 In Civil Appeal Nos 12164-12166 of 2016, With IA Nos 5, 6 And 7 In CA No 12169 of 2016 With CA No 12170 of 2016 And Other Unregistered I.A.s On Board - - - Dated:- 31-3-2017 - CJI Jagdish Singh Khehar, Dr D. Y. Chandrachud And L Nageswara Rao, JJ. For Appearing Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Sr. Adv.(AAG) Parties Mr. B. Balaji, Adv. Mr. Muthuvel Palani, Adv. Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv. Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv. Mr.R.Venkata Ramani, Sr.Adv. Mr.V. G. Pragasam, Adv. Mr.Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv. Mr. Yashraj Singh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... off, Adv. Mr.V.N.Raghupathy, Adv. Mr.Parikshit P.Angadi, Adv. Mr. Chinmay Deshpande, Adv. Mr.Jayesh K.Unnikrishnan, Adv. Ms.Manju Das, Adv. Mr.Aviral Kashyap, Adv. Ms. Sasmita Tripathy, Adv. Mr.Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr.Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Adv. Mr.S.K.Das, Adv. Mr.R.Nedumaran, Adv. Ms.Suvira Lal, Adv. Mr.M.C.Dhingra, Adv. Ms.G.N.Rampal, Adv. Mr.Pijush Kant Roy, Adv. Mr.Ravi Kamal Gupta, Adv Mr.Nikunj Dayal, Adv. Mr. Pramod Dayal, Adv. Ms. Payal Dayal, Adv. Mr.Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, Adv. Mr.M.Paikaray, Adv. Mr.Sumanth Nookala, Adv. Mr.Goli Ramakrishna, Adv. Mr.Vinay Navare, Adv. Ms.Abha R.Sharma, Adv. Mr.Kaleeswaram Raj, Adv. Mr.Suvidutt M.S., Adv. Mr.Sai Deepak Iyer, Adv. Mr.Arnold Harvey, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Nagar, Adv. Mr.Manoj V.George, Adv. Mr.B.D.Das, Adv. Ms.Shilpa Liza George, Adv. Mr.Amit Masih, Adv. Mr.Tarun Kant Samantray, Adv. Mr.Roy Abraham, Adv. Ms.Seema Jain, Adv. Ms.Rajni Ohri Lal, Adv. for Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR Mr.Pankaj Pandey, Adv. Dr. Gajendra Prasad Singh, Adv. Mr. S. Thananjayan, Adv. Mr. Jothimanian, Adv. Mr. V. K. Biju, Adv. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Adv. Mr.V.Balaji, Adv. Mr.T.Ashok Kumar, Adv Mr.Prashant Kenjale, Adv. Mr.Atul Sharma, Adv. Ms.Sripradha K., Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e limits of a municipal corporation, city, town or local authority; (iii) The existing licences which have already been renewed prior to the date of this order shall continue until the term of the licence expires but no later than 1 April 2017; (iv) All signages and advertisements of the availability of liquor shall be prohibited and existing ones removed forthwith both on national and state highways; (v) No shop for the sale of liquor shall be (i) visible from a national or state highway; (ii) directly accessible from a national or state highway and (iii) situated within a distance of 500 metres of the outer edge of the national or state highway or of a service lane along the highway. (vi) All States and Union territories are mandated to strictly enforce the above directions. The Chief Secretaries and Directors General of Police shall within one month chalk out a plan for enforcement in consultation with the state revenue and home departments. Responsibility shall be assigned inter alia to District Collectors and Superintendents of Police and other competent authorities. Compliance shall be strictly monitored by calling for fortnightly reports on action tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. Tamil Nadu 5. We may indicate that the following States have not filed any applications : 1. Arunachal Pradesh 2. Assam 3. Bihar 4. Chhattisgarh 5. Goa 6. Gujarat 7. Haryana 8. Madhya Pradesh 9. Maharashtra 10. Manipur 11. Mizoram 12. Nagaland 13. Odisha 14. Punjab 15. Rajasthan 16. Tripura 17. Uttar Pradesh 18. West Bengal 6. During the course of the proceedings, an affidavit has been filed by the Chief Secretary of the Government of Madhya Pradesh stating that the judgment rendered by this Court has been accepted by the State Government, following a resolution by the Council of Ministers on 16 January 2017. The Chief Secretary informs the Court that : In compliance of the order of 15 December, 2016 passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, New Delhi, in Civil Appeal No.12164-12166/2016, the Council of Ministers of Madhya Pradesh, in its meeting at 16th January has ensured to comply in the Excise Policy Year 2017-18 that there shall be no Liquor Shop situated within a distance of 500 Metre from the service lane of the National/State Highways. No Liquor S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the location of liquor shops with reference to the highways. For instance, it has been stated that the distance prescribed in certain state excise rules is 220 metres. Similarly an exemption is available for municipal and local areas through which a segment of a highway passes. It has been urged that the prescription of distance under the state excise rules is interfered with by the directions issued by this Court which prohibit shops for the sale of liquor within a distance of 500 metres from the outer edge of national or state highways or of a service lane along the highway. The learned Attorney General submits that topographic and geographical conditions of each State are distinct, which is why excise rules across the country prescribe varying distances from the highways for location of liquor shops. Hence it has been urged that it is not appropriate for this Court to prescribe a fixed distance of 500 metres. The Attorney General urge that the Committee appointed by this Court (chaired by Justice S.Radhakrishnan, a former Judge of this Court) recommended a distance only of 100 metres. The error, in the submission of the Attorney General, lies in comparing national and state h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court has also relied upon advisories issued by MoRTH to the States and Union Territories on 26 October 2007, 1 December 2011, 18 March 2013 and 21 May 2014. Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act is indicative of a Parliamentary intent to penalise driving under the influence of alcohol. The conclusions which have been drawn by this Court in paragraph 9 of its judgment, which we extract below are hence based, on the considered policy of the Union Government : 9. The material which has been placed on record indicates that : (i) India has a high rate of road accidents and fatal road accidents one of the advisories states that it is the highest in the world with an accident occurring every four minutes; (ii) There is a high incidence of road accidents due to driving under the influence of alcohol; (iii) The existence of liquor vends on national highways is in the considered view of the National Road Safety Council and Mo RTH expert authorities with domain knowledge a cause for road accidents on national highways; (iv) Advisories have been issued to the State Governments and Union Territories to close down liquor vends on national highways and to ensur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prevent ready availability of liquor to users of a highway. In any event, no private individual can be heard to make a grievance of the prescription of 500 metres which is manifestly in public interest. 16. In the teeth of the statistics on road accidents which are made available to the court by MoRTH, we are not inclined to accept the submission of Shri K.K.Venugopal, learned senior counsel, that drunken driving is not the most important cause of road accidents (over-speeding according to learned counsel being the main cause). Over-speeding can also occur due to the driver being under influence of alcohol. Learned counsel urged that even in a dry state like Gujarat, accidents occur due to drunken driving. Apart from the questionable authenticity of a private web-site on the internet, we have considered it more appropriate to place reliance on official data of MoRTH. It is also necessary to emphasise that there is a tendency to under-report drunken driving as a cause of accidents with a view not to prejudice the claims of victims or their heirs to compensation. In fact even the data relied upon by Shri Venugopal states that in 2011, the highest prevalence of accidents due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility of liquor along such stretches of national or state highways would merely allow drivers to replenish the stock of alcohol, resulting in a situation which the policy seeks to avoid in the first place the directions which have been issued by this Court restrain the grant of licences for the sale of liquor along national and state highways and within a stipulated distance of 500 metres of the outer edge of a highway or of a service lane along the state highway. Sale of liquor along the highways is not exhaustive of the broad canvas of areas in which licences which may be granted by a State. Apart from areas along the national and state highways (or the stipulated distance of 500 metres), licences can be granted over other areas of the States and Union Territories subject to compliance with the other requirements of the excise rules. No state has placed any data before the Court to indicate that no licence can be granted at all by it in an area other than along a state highway or the buffer distance prescribed. It would defy reason to assume that in municipal areas, availability of liquor is only along the segment of a highway. It may be attractive to the vendor to sell liquor al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt may require to be suitably modulated without affecting the basic principle underlying the judgment. . The first is in relation to limits of local bodies with a population of less than 20,000 people. In such areas, it has been urged before this Court that a state highway is the main thoroughfare area along which the township has developed in small clusters of 20,000 or less. Hence, the requirement of maintaining a distance of 500 metres from the outer edge of the highway or service lane may result in a situation where the entire local area may fall within the prohibited distance. We find some substance in the submission. We must emphatically clarify that even in such areas falling under local bodies with a population of less than 20,000, no licence for the sale of liquor should be issued along either a national or state highway or a service lane along the highway. Similarly, the sale of liquor should be from a point which is neither visible from a national or state highway or which is directly accessible from a national or state highway. However, in such a situation, the prohibited distance should in our view be restricted to 220 metres from the outer edge of the national or sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erated by TASMAC which is a state owned entity. In the judgment of this Court, time until 1 April, 2017 was granted on the request of the State. Hence, we decline to grant any further extension to the State of Tamil Nadu. 25. The third area is in relation to the States of Sikkim (argued by Shri A.K.Ganguly, learned senior counsel) and Meghalaya which have moved this Court for a suitable modification of the judgment having regard to the nature of the hilly terrain. In relation to the State of Sikkim, this Court has been apprised on behalf of the State Government that nearly 82 per cent of the area of the state is forested and 92 per cent of the shops will have to be closed as a result of the directions of this Court. Similarly, the State of Meghalaya has placed before this Court peculiar conditions prevailing in the State as a result of the hilly terrain. We are of the view that insofar as the States of Meghalaya and Sikkim are concerned, it would suffice if the two states are exempted only from the application of the 500 metre distance requirement provided in paragraph 24(v)(iii) of the judgment of this Court on 15 December 2016. 26. Insofar as the State of Himachal Pradesh i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
