The Supreme Court has requested the assistance of solicitor general Tushar Mehta regarding a public interest litigation (PIL) that challenges the sale of alcohol in tetra packs. The petition alleges that the packaging, which resembles fruit juice, could mislead consumers, particularly minors, and pose significant public health risks. The court has granted the Centre four weeks to respond to the petition submitted by the organisation Community Against Drunken Driving.

A bench led by Justice Vikram Nath noted that despite a notice being issued in May, the Centre had not yet provided a response nor had any legal representation appeared on its behalf. The court stated, “We grant four weeks to the Union of India to file its counter affidavit. In the meantime, the petitioner may serve a copy of the paper book on the office of the solicitor general. List after six weeks.”

Concerns Over Misleading Packaging and Underage Drinking

The petition was presented by advocate Vipin Nair, who expressed concern over the Centre’s lack of engagement on the matter. He highlighted that the alcoholic beverages are marketed under misleading names and images that attract minors. The petition specifically mentions brands such as ‘Bunty Premium Vodka’, ‘Chilli Mango Vodka’, and ‘Premium Romanov Vodka – Apple Thrill’, arguing that these labels are designed to deceive consumers.

Nair pointed out that the use of fruit imagery and names on the packaging exacerbates this deception. He claimed that these tetra packs not only facilitate underage drinking but also contribute to broader public health issues. The PIL further argues that unlike tobacco products, which carry mandatory health warnings, these alcoholic beverages often lack visible warnings, making them more accessible to young people.

Additionally, the petition calls for mandatory age verification for alcohol sales, as current regulations prohibit sales to individuals under the age of 18. The petition emphasises that the misleading nature of the packaging encourages public drinking and drunk driving, while also raising concerns about smuggling across state borders.

Opposition from the Packaging Industry

The petition faced opposition from the Action Alliance for Recycling Beverage Cartons (AARC), a consortium of companies involved in packaging, including those selling alcoholic beverages. Senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing AARC, argued that there is no inherent harm in selling alcohol in tetra packs and sachets. He contended that such packaging reduces the risk of adulteration and is permissible under the existing excise laws in ten states.

Datar provided examples of alcoholic beverages in tetra packs and asserted that health regulations fall under state jurisdiction. The court has permitted AARC to participate in the proceedings and has allowed the association time to submit its response to the petition. Furthermore, the court has directed state authorities to provide their input on the matter.

The petition also raises concerns about the definitions of “bottling” and “bottle” in various state excise acts, which are reportedly broad and inconsistent. This inconsistency allows for the sale of liquor in portable containers such as PET bottles, plastic sachets, and tetra packs across different states. The petition advocates that states should prioritise health and environmental considerations over revenue generation from alcohol sales.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store – https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share