Indian constitution is a very unique and largest written liberal democratic constitution of the world. Its object is to guide the path and progress of India. Directive principles of state policy are one of the important and inseparable features of the Indian Constitution codified under chapter IV from the Article 36 to 51 which aims to make a welfare state i.e., to establish social and economic democracy of state. They are also known as the Kernel Of Indian Constitution.
According to Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, these are the novel guidelines and should be kept in mind while forming any new policy or law. Article 47 of our constitution stated under chapter IV talks about nutrition, public health, and standard of living. It empowers the state with the duty to make a welfare state by looking into the matter of raising the level of nutrition and standard of living of its people. Furthermore to check the health of its people and to achieve this goal the state has the power to prohibit the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs which are injurious to the health and social well being of mankind.
During this pandemic when every country of the world whether developed or not doesn’t matter are under total lockdown for two months, India in its two phases was in total lockdown which affected the world economy and India is not out of that list. So in its third phase, the Indian government took an apparently vital decision to let liquor shops open and sell alcohol at high prices to improve the economy to handle this virus. As the revenue from alcohol is the second and thirdhighest contributor to the state’s tax revenue. 1.75 lakh crore excise duty collected on liquor by all revenue states and two Union Territories but don’t forget it’s only the excise duty, some states slaps a certain percent of VAT also.
But with the above facts which boost our economy another face of alcohol consumption is very unpleasant and which raises the question that whether such a decision taken by the government irrespective of this present time is favorable for citizens or not? Alcohol consumption contributes to over three billion deaths each year globally and there has been a constant increase in deaths worldwide. As it is rightly defined that Alcohol: temporary fun with permanent consequences.
Alcohol or liquor is the cause of many infectious diseases like digestive diseases, non-communicable diseases like diabetes, kidney disease, cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, chronic respiratory diseases, and suicides. Some of which are only attracted when alcohol is consumed. In India, 32% of adults are current alcohol consumers. Besides health hazards, other harms are often attributable to alcoholism such as domestic violence, harm caused to children and in this present time of lockdown, many incidents of domestic violence were being reported in India. Online selling has also been permitted which altogether will increase alcohol consumption due to the lack of work, isolation, and stress-induced from the surrounding environment. Article 25 of UDHR, Article 12 of International covenant on economic, social, and cultural rights and Article 3 of International health regulation are all related to global health and defines and formulates the right to health.
But if such selling gets terminated then will it be the infringement of the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business to all citizens subject to Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India? Supreme court in Khodays distilleries case answered the question that trade in liquor is Res Extra Commercium i.e., outside the scope of commerce and thus no fundamental right exist to sell liquor and state have total authority to trade in liquor, a citizen under state’s permission can engage in such trade. Another Article 21 in which the right to consume alcohol is impliedly protected will supersede Article 47? This was answered by Kerala high court in M.S.Anoop v. State of Kerala in negative that however trade in liquor is under state’s right to trade but the spirit of Article 47 should be upheld and same cannot be diluted under Article 21.
Achieving the goals of Directive principles of state policy should be the paramount duty of the state and in some cases like Minerva mills case, Ashoka Kumar v. UOI, MH. Hamid v. State of Bihar etc. the importance of Article 47 was stated and held that merely because DPSP is not justifiable they cannot be subordinate to Fundamental rights. Additionally, the government always has the power to enforce Article 47 fully in each state where there exist no Fundamental rights to trade in liquor and no consumption further. Yes, during this crisis where the economy is on verge of depression, rather than enhancing trade in liquor government could have taken other steps to boost the economy because this trade in liquor has a very deteriorating effect on social and physical well being of people.
As larger public interest should prevail over individual rights as frequently coined by the apex court in many decisions. WHO and other health organizations suggest to increase the immunity of individuals to fight with this virus but how can it be possible in the present scenario? Apart from this pandemic time, liquor should be prohibited in general also or its consumption should be restricted by law like in states of Gujrat, Bihar, Nagaland, Mizoram as well as Union Territory of Lakshadweep so that everyone could lead a better life. Thus the Govt.should take better decisions to avoid the effect of increasing the burden on healthcare infrastructure as good health is true wealth.
References:
economictimes.indiatimes.com
Bare Act: Constitution Of India
0 Comments