Debate on industrial alcohol continues

A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, is currently mired in a contentious debate: does 'industrial alcohol' classify as 'intoxicating liquor,' subject to state regulation? The case, which dates back to 2010, hinges on conflicting interpretations and implications for regulatory authority.

Advocate Dinesh Dwivedi on behalf of the UP government argues for state jurisdiction, citing Entry 8 of List II. The heart of the dispute lies within the Industrial (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951.

The conflict arises from the Industrial (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, & its 2016 amendment, which empowers the centre to regulate industries engaged in producing, supplying and distributing in trade and commerce of industrial alcohol. Under Entry 52 of List I, Parliament in public interest can enact a law to regulate any industry.

CJI said the bench is "facing a conundrum as the two entries, Entry 52 of List I and Entry 8 of List II, are identical in nature and there is a complete overlap of jurisdiction of Centre and states. One way of deciding it is to rely on the federal structure of governance and the other is to take guidance from Article 246(1)", which explains distribution of law-making power of Parliament and assemblies.

The hearing on the debatable matter is continuing.