Bar & Bench News Network
Bollywood chocolate-boy Imran Khan, along with his brother-in-law Vedant Malik, have filed a PIL in the Bombay High Court today, challenging the Maharashtra government’s decision to raise the legal drinking age to 25 years.
"By this PIL I am not promoting drinking but fighting for the constitutional right of the youth in India. When a 21-year-old is allowed to marry, vote and do several other things, then he or she should also be allowed to indulge in any legal activity including consumption of liquor," Imran is said to have told the reporters after filing the PIL, Indian Express reports.
It has been gathered that the state of Maharashtra has been notifying different age limits for the consumption of hard liquor from time to time. The minimum legal age prescribed for drinking hard liquor in 1972 was 21 years. In 1979, it was increased to 30 years, in 1982 it was again reduced to 25 years. In January 2001 and July 2001 it was reduced to 21 years and in September, 2005 it was yet again increased to 25 years, though this law has remained without teeth till date.
In order to confirm whether this 2005 notification of the state government still stood strong, the petitioners filed an RTI application with the state government, to which they received a response saying that the legal age had been amended from 21 years to 25 years.
As a result of this, the petitioners have now filed the present PIL through their Counsel Ameet Naik of Naik Naik & Co. They have listed the State of Maharashtra and Commissioner of Excise as respondents. In his PIL, petitioner Imran opined that the legal drinking age of 25 years is one of the highest in the world and has termed the notification as “unconstitutional, arbitrary and unreasonable”. The PIL argues that the notification seeks to impose unjust restriction on youths in the age group 18 to 21. “Raising the age limit from 21 to 25 years would only increase a desire for the ‘forbidden fruit’ among the youths which would make them drink illegally, seek other intoxicants and encourage bootlegging", the PIL argues.
It is hearty to note that youth heart-throbs like Imran Khan are coming up to support such social causes purely in the interest of the general public.
Bar & Bench has received an official copy of the PIL. It thus remains to be seen whether the legal drinking age in Maharashtra will be reduced or not.
|
- 1. "Heartening, rather than hearty?". Grussell, Bangalore
- 2. "could you please upload the copy of the PIL?". Naman, Delhi
- 3. "I support the Maharashtra Government that the age of drinking should be raised from 18 years to 25 years.I intend to join the Petition and request the Bombay High Court to support what has been said by the Maharashtra Government.". Vincent Nazareth, (Unknown City?)
Related Stories
- Airlines' woes continue as BPCL files winding up petition against Kingfisher
- Jet files petition in Bombay High Court, NAG files petition in Chennai High Court
- Juris Corp, J.Sagar advise on Lodha restructuring; Lodha files for IPO with Wadia Ghandy, Amarchand and Linklaters
- Reliance Infratel files DRHP again, retains same legal team
- Naik Naik & Co obtain release of Jail
- Bombay businessman files PIL demanding suspension of 26/11 police commissioners
- HC lawyer files suit against 'Paa' for poking fun at disabled people
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
- SC to hear petition challenging appointment of sitting AP High Court judge; Petition alleges deliberate concealment of pending criminal investigation at the time of enrollment
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










