The Supreme Court raised significant queries regarding the authority of states to regulate industrial alcohol, particularly in light of recent hooch tragedies, emphasizing the states’ role as custodians of public health. A nine-judge constitution bench is currently deliberating on the jurisdictional overlaps between the Centre and states concerning the production, manufacturing, supply, and regulation of industrial alcohol.
During the hearing, the bench, led by Chief Justice D Chandrachud, questioned Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, on why states cannot exercise regulatory powers over industrial alcohol to prevent its misuse. The bench underscored the pressing concern of hooch tragedies and the paramount importance of safeguarding public health, urging clarity on the states’ authority in this matter.
The legal dispute stems from conflicting interpretations regarding the regulatory framework for industrial alcohol. While a previous seven-judge constitution bench ruled in favour of central regulatory powers in 1997, the matter was referred to the current nine-judge bench in 2010. The central question revolves around whether states possess the jurisdiction to impose regulations and fees on industrial alcohol to mitigate risks associated with its misuse.
The bench highlighted the practical implications of denying states regulatory powers, particularly concerning public health and law enforcement within their territories. It challenged the Centre’s stance, emphasizing the states’ legitimate concerns and responsibilities as custodians of public welfare.
In response, the Centre argued that regulatory authority over industrial alcohol lies exclusively with the central government under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, of 1951. Solicitor General Mehta emphasized the broader implications of the court’s interpretation, stressing the need to consider the impact on various industries covered under the legislative framework.
The hearing, which addressed complex constitutional and jurisdictional issues, remained inconclusive and is scheduled to resume on April 16. The outcome of this legal battle will have far-reaching implications for the regulation of industrial alcohol and the balance of power between the Centre and states in India’s federal structure.
