Mumbai: Bombay High Court recently by investigations remains together and reject authority from taking coercion measures against three people who deal with ethyl alcohol and are accused of not adhering to the rules of licenses stipulated by the State and Law on Maharashtra’s prohibition.
Three petitions raise general questions “whether the Petitioner …, which dealt with ethyl alcohol, is required to get a license under the rules of the Spirit Return Bombay, 1951 and whether they must be prosecuted because they do not comply with the rules, 1951 and the Law on Maharashtra, 1949.
” HC bench from Judge Nitin Jamdar and Kotwal’s nest noted that the petition was archived to cancel three different legal shots and to decide the legal point.
HC said that the senior Aabad Ponda advisor appeared for one of the Petitioners and Advocates Hrishikesh Mundaragi who appeared on two petitions Others have raised the estimated legal question.
Thus acknowledged the petition and put them to hear the next on January 24, 2022.
On this problem whether ethanol / ethyl alcohol was liquor or drunk in the Law on Maharashtra’s prohibition to attract prosecution, there were two decisions which benefits the applicants, HC notes.
State country Pat that even if it does not have the power to collect taxes on ethanol / ethyl alcohol, it has the power to regulate its use, and to make effective regulations, the applicant must get a license.
Section 65 ACT provides a penalty for illegal import of fever or flax.
‘Infoxican’ is defined as liquor, intoxicating drugs, opium or other substances that are expressed as core.
Additional Public Prosecutor J P Yagnik said when the authorities visited the applicant’s place, they found an ethyl alcohol / ethanol bottle.
For storage and sales of ethanol, the license below the 1951 rule is needed, and no one has a license and, therefore, it is a violation submitted by FIR.
The advice argues that ethanol / ethyl alcohol is for laboratory industrial units and it is not liquor for consumption, as referred to in the law and therefore said it did not have the power to demand a license.
This product is not feasible for consumption and under the Industrial Law (Development and Regulation), 2016, ‘ethanol / ethyl alcohol’ under the legislative domain of the central and state governments has no power over alcohol which is not intended for human consumption.
The state said the applicants imported ethyl alcohol and laboratory chemicals and sold them for making cough syrup.
“Sales of alcohol for cough syrup using ethyl alcohol is not permitted, ” said the country, adding that the use of ethyl alcohol as a state fluid also contains more than 96% alcohol.
In short, the state believes that even though there is a HC assessment to support the applicants that the license is not It is needed for ethyl alcohol, it should be considered again as the definition of ethanol / ethyl alcohol since it changed with the Indian standard bureau changing the specifications.
HC while investigations and coercional steps clarify that “countries can ensure that ethyl alcohol, both in making or after making it, it is Not transferred or misused for drinking purposes and countries can make the necessary regulations require an industry to submit a periodic statement of raw materials and ethanol finished products and can verify the contents.
“
Ethanol licensing: HC remains probe in 3 firs
