The Delhi High Court has adjourned BJP MP Parvesh Sahib Singh Verma’s petition challenging the Delhi Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2021, related to grant of licence for home delivery of liquor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla could not take up the matter due to paucity of time. The next date of hearing is July 7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Filed through Advocates Balaji Srinivasan and Pallavi Sengupta, the plea has challenged Rule 66(6) of the Delhi Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2021, which has introduced a scheme of licensing for home delivery of Indian and foreign-made liquors through mobile applications or websites. The 2021 Amendment Rules, dated May 25, 2021, which were notified by the Delhi Government on May 31, 2021, amended the Delhi Excise Rules, 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The plea has alleged that the Rule was inconsistent with the Delhi Excise Act, 2009, which criminalised consumption of liquor in public places. It further alleges that “home delivery” of liquor would encourage increased alcohol consumption and result in an increase in domestic violence cases against women, children and vulnerable sections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The plea has sought quashing of Rule 66(6) of the Delhi Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2021; and a direction calling for the records with respect to the said Rule. \u201cThe Rule violates the most critical national policy and is in complete disregard of Article 47 of the Constitution of India that casts a duty on the Respondent (Delhi Government) to improve public health by inter alia reducing the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs which are injurious, dangerous, harmful to health.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court division bench could not take up the matter related to granting of licence for home delivery of liquor due to paucity of time. The next date of hearing is July 7.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":143505,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[246,58578],"tags":[86226,109554,116608],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2021\/02\/22133935\/Delhi-HC-3.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/265862"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=265862"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/265862\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/143505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=265862"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=265862"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=265862"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}