It is unlikely that the petitioner in the Patna High Court who on Wednesday challenged the imposition of total prohibition in Bihar with immediate effect will get any relief. The courts generally tend not to pronounce on such issues. The petitioner has sought the court’s intervention on the ground that the ban on the sale and consumption of liquor violated human rights and interfered with citizen’s freedom to decide as to what to eat or drink.
In a collegiate debate such an argument might find some resonance but it is unlikely to find favour with the judges who will also bear in mind that imposing prohibition was one of the poll promises made by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. But we should be concerned with the more deleterious fall-out of a complete ban on the sale and consumption of liquor, though existing liquor manufacturing units would continue to function as before with their produce to be sold outside Bihar.
Clearly, experience of failed attempts at enforcing prohibition has not taught Kumar anything. Whether it was the US in the late 1920s or Haryana more recently, prohibition only tends to incentivize illicit distillation, distribution and consumption of liquor. Hooch tragedies in which scores of people die due to the consumption of contaminated liquor become a recurring feature under prohibition. Given the state of the law and order in ‘lawless’ Bihar, the enforcement of prohibition will needlessly divert the energies of the police force and become another lucrative source of corruption for them and other limbs of the administration.
Lawlessness and crime associated with bootlegging, which is bound to flourish, will be a direct outcome of the ban on liquor. Given that liquor is freely available in neighbouring Jharkhand, UP and Nepal, new liquor mafias will emerge to service Biharis addicted to the bottle. After all, thousands directly or indirectly engaged in the liquor business have to find alternative work. Indeed, had Kumar polled his own colleagues in the legislature, more to the point, had he cared to seek the advice of Lalu Yadav, he would have refrained from taking such a drastic step. The truth is that a vast majority of legislators are fond of their evening tipple.
But that is not the reason he should have desisted from imposing prohibition. No, the real reason had to be financial. Bihar is woefully short of cash. By deciding to forgo nearly Rs. 4,000 crore that various levies on the sale of liquor yield annually, the Chief Minister has consciously deprived the State of a substantial source of revenue. Trying to make up for the loss by increasing value-added-tax on a few items or extending VAT to few more articles will not be enough.
Indeed, enforcing prohibition might entail additional costs insofar as an army of excise, police and border guards might be required to ensure that no Bihari is able to access liquor while he is within the boundaries of the State. Biharis might have to take the trouble of crossing over to the neighbouring States to quench their thirst for the heady brew before getting back home, which again might open another avenue for the police to exploit for a quick buck. Such possibilities are immense when a government acts so thoughtlessly.
Nitish Kumar had first enforced the ban on country liquor and Indian Made Foreign Liquor in rural areas from 1st April but four days later he extended it throughout the State. He said he was overwhelmed by the positive response he received from women and decided to go the whole hog. Violators of the ban on the sale and consumption of liquor will face strict punishment, which can attract life imprisonment and even death sentence.
Again, stringent punishment empowers the police to extract bigger bribes than they would otherwise get from the violators, real or imaginary. The point is that politicians cannot force ‘reform’ down the parched throats of those habituated to drink. Kumar might have the best intentions for the people of his State, he might want to prevent the abuse of women by drunken men, might seek to protect meagre family budgets against waste on liquor, but changing human nature is well-nigh difficult.
A show of such paternalism in Haryana had brought a strongman like late Bansi Lal to his knees, forcing him to roll back prohibition. We hate to say this but Nitish Kumar will feel obliged to revise his decision sooner than later. For it has not succeeded anywhere — no, not even in Gujarat where an underground bootleg industry flourishes unchecked. And it is not going to succeed in Bihar either.
