The following article is based on my own interpretation of the said events. Any material borrowed from published and unpublished sources has been appropriately referenced. I will bear the sole responsibility for anything that is found to have been copied or misappropriated or misrepresented in the following post.
Darshit Shah, MBA 2015-17, Vinod Gupta School of Management, IIT Kharagpur
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jaylalitha has announced phased prohibition of alcohol in the state if she is voted back to power. She seems to follow the footsteps of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar who has recently implemented a complete liquor ban in the state. Women and children in Bihar may have a reason to rejoice but this ban has not gone down well with all in the state. There have instances soon after the ban was imposed where people addicted to alcohol had to be admitted to hospital. Also, people suffering from alcohol withdrawal symptoms have attempted to kill themselves. This recent ban has added fuel to the fire – the debate on liquor ban.
The people against the liquor ban argue over the loss to the economy as well as to government revenues due to loss of tax collected from sale, consumption and production of liquor and the back door it creates for black marketing. However, these people fail to realize the ban has served the purpose of a decrease in crime rate under the influence of liquor- rape cases, drinking, driving etc.
A more legitimate counter argument that these people can provide is the ban completely served its sole purpose of safety of its citizens. With the ban, the government proposes safety of its citizens which does seem to be like an illusion. The highly inflated price of liquor at the black market is a cause of concern. The poor resort to the cheap liquor which is adulterated. In 2009, Gujarat which has a liquor ban was hit by hooch tragedy resulting in many deaths. Hence, when implementing such a ban, the government must ensure it serves the desired purpose.