No logic in Kerala bar closure: SC

The Supreme Court questioned the "logic" behind the Kerala government's new liquor policy to shut down 730 bars across the State, branding them as "sub-standard", while letting watering holes in five-star hotels function without any restriction. The Supreme Court stopped the Kerala government from implementing its new liquor policy under which 730 bar owners were asked to shut shop while sparing five-star hotels. The policy was to be implemented from September 12. Here are how the arguments done in SC

Mr. Kapil Sibal (arguing for Kerala):

Liquor consumption in the State had led to a “social impact on the family and savings of the family are spent on liquor.”

Mr. Fali Nariman (Arguing for Bar owners):

The policy was flawed at the outset. “Now a person can very well go to a toddy shop to buy liquor or go home and drink”

Mr. Aryama Sundaram (Arguing for Bar owners):

“You cannot distinguish between the rich and the poor. This is like saying let them dance in five-star hotels and not in other hotels.”

Mr. Kapil Sibal:

“Dance and liquor are different commodities. May be one leads to the other. Till liquor prevails, there is social evil in Kerala.”

Mr. Sundaram:

“But what is the point of this prohibition? Clubs at five-star hotels are allowed. Toddy is left untouched. Only 10 per cent government outlets will be closed every year. The quantity of liquor has not been curbed.”

Justice Dave:

“If it [drinking] is a social problem, then stop it for everybody. This has gone on for years. Why stop it abruptly? If you [State government] think this is a bad thing, stop it. But do it for everyone,”

“Individual discipline and not State discipline is what is required.”

“Will it not be better for you to educate the people first?”