When Chief Minister Nitish Kumar banned the sale of alcohol in Bihar in 2016, it sparked mixed reactions. Recently, the Patna High Court castigated State government officials, suggesting that they were making money from the rampant illicit liquor trade enabled by them.
The High Court made strong remarks while overturning the demotion of an inspector accused of negligence in enforcing the prohibition law.
The 24-page order, issued on October 19 and made public on November 13, stated that the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, which was intended to raise living standards and public health (but failed), finds itself “on the wrong side of the history”.
Also Read | Booze bumps: Time to turn around TASMAC from its terrible mess
The court noted that the police as well as officials of the excise, tax, and transport departments were colluding with bootleggers and pointed out that the poor were becoming both victims of hooch tragedies and offenders under the law for consumption of liquor.
However, women in Bihar have generally supported the ban, citing a reduction in domestic violence, though they criticise the authorities for the spread of illicit liquor trade and the indiscriminate arrests of people who consume alcohol.
When the political strategist Prashant Kishor launched his Jan Suraaj Party on October 2 in Patna, a key promise he made was to lift the liquor ban. Addressing a public meeting he said: “Currently, Bihar incurs a loss of Rs.20,000 crore each year due to the liquor ban. For Bihar to achieve a world-class education system, an investment of Rs.5 lakh crore is required over the next 10 years. Once the liquor ban is lifted, that money will be dedicated solely to establishing a new education system in Bihar.”
The Ranchi-based social activist Sudhir Pal, who supports prohibition, expressed disappointment about its implementation. “Prohibition of alcohol in Bihar was a commendable step, with studies like those from The Lancet highlighting its positive impact, particularly in reducing domestic violence,” he told Frontline. “However, while the policy itself was sound, its implementation faced significant challenges. The reliance on the existing bureaucratic structure, coupled with entrenched patriarchal mindsets and a lack of community involvement, created unintended consequences. This led to what can be described as an ‘‘aapda mein awasar” (crisis in opportunity)”, he said, referring to the rise of the illicit liquor trade.
Empower women’s groups to enforce alcohol ban
Pal suggested that a more effective approach would have been to empower the Mahila Sabhas (women’s groups) within the gram sabhas to dismantle the illicit liquor trade, rather than entrusting high-level bureaucrats, wielding legal authority, with the task.
Seized bottles of liquor being destroyed in Patna.
| Photo Credit:
RANJEET KUMAR
“Since the ‘Gram Kutchhery’ or ‘Gram Nyayalaya’, a legally mandated institution, comprises elected representatives of the village, prohibition could have been more easily enforced through this community-driven structure,” Pal said. With 50 per cent of these representatives being women, the initiative would likely have been supported by them, had it been implemented in letter and spirit, he said. “Instead, the flawed execution resulted in corruption, allowing some individuals to exploit the situation for illegal gain. A community-driven approach, where local groups monitor and curb alcohol consumption, destroy illegal liquor stocks, and penalise offenders, would have provided a more sustainable, people-centric solution.”
Apart from Bihar, the only other States where alcohol is prohibited are Gujarat, Mizoram, and Nagaland. In the 1990s, undivided Andhra Pradesh, imposed prohibition in the face of massive protests by women. But the ban was short lived. It was revoked within two years as the State government faced major revenue losses.
After the Bihar government enacted the law in April 2016 prohibiting the manufacture, trade, storage, transportation, sale, and consumption of liquor in the State, Chief Minister Nitish Kumar stated that it had “tremendous support from the people, particularly women and children”. The Bihar government went from a ban on countrymade liquor to a full liquor ban within five days. Nitish Kumar cited Article 47 of the Constitution to support the move, according to which it is the mandate of the State to raise living standards and improve public health.
Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar flagging off an alcohol prohibition campaign on the occasion of De-addiction Day, in Patna, on November 26, 2021.
| Photo Credit:
PTI
Political analysts commented that the measure was aimed at strengthening the caste-neutral constituency of women, which played a substantial role in Nitish Kumar’s victory in the October 2015 Bihar election. He had also already prepared the ground to secure women’s votes with schemes like free bicycles for girl students.
In February 2020, Nitish Kumar also made a strong pitch for a nationwide ban on alcohol and sought to take the message to Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Jharkhand, but nothing came of it. In fact, the neighbouring State of Jharkhand became a transit point for illegal liquor to enter Bihar.
Implementation tough, burden on judiciary
Over the next few years, criticism over hooch deaths and the large number of arrests prompted the Nitish Kumar government to tweak a number of provisions of the Prohibition Act. Key amendments included the release of first-time drinkers on the spot against a fine of Rs.2,000-Rs.5,000, replacing the earlier mandatory punishment of imprisonment; reducing the punishment for drinking from 10 years to 5 years; and restoring the Rs.4 lakh compensation to the next of kin of hooch victims, which was not paid for years after the passage of the 2016 law.
The government also revoked the provision to confiscate the home of an offender and allowed the release of vehicles impounded for transporting liquor after the payment of only 10 per cent of its insurance cover. Earlier that figure was 50 per cent.
In 2021, the then Chief Justice of India (CJI), N.V. Ramana, dubbed the Bihar liquor law an example of “lack of oversight”. “There are three lakh cases pending in the courts. People are waiting for justice for a long time, and now the excessive cases related to liquor violations put additional burden on courts… the applications pertaining to bails in liquor prohibition are admitted in large numbers in the High Court,” the CJI had said during a discussion on challenges before the Indian judicial system.
Also Read | Deadly brew: The persistent menace of hooch in Tamil Nadu
But the final word on prohibition is not out yet.
Ajay Gudavarthy, Associate Professor at the Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, noted that the rising significance of women as voters makes prohibition an electoral tool worth considering. “Demand for prohibition has grown stronger alongside the emergence of women as an independent constituency in electoral politics,” he told Frontline. “However, land and liquor remain the two largest sources of revenue for State governments. Gujarat has successfully implemented prohibition, and there is no reason why other States cannot follow suit if it’s a popular demand by womenfolk who link liquor consumption to domestic violence and debt.”
One thing is clear: the issue of prohibition in Bihar is bound to raise political temperatures now as the Assembly election is due within a year and political parties have started taking clear positions on the issue.
People still remember the huge traction former Chief Minister Lalu Prasad got when he removed toddy tax in 1991. Even in 2016, Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal prevailed upon Nitish Kumar (when they were allies in the Bihar government) to continue to allow the sale of toddy. After a hooch tragedy in the State, Lalu Prasad had suggested that toddy be consumed instead of spurious liquor.
The 2025 Assembly election could see a lot of debate around the issue.
