‘Govt must be accountable for alcohol-related crimes’

Justice Anand Venkatesh while passing orders on a bail plea arising out of a drunken brawl resulting in a person committing suicide, said “The government certainly cannot wash off its hand from the adverse effects of this policy of selling liquor to its own people.

The government must be made responsible at some point of time for the increasing criminal offences committed under the influence of alcohol.”

Noting that Section 107 of CrPC which deals with instigating a person to commit the offence will squarely apply to the government in this regard, the judge said “The government very well knows the deleterious effects of alcohol upon its citizens. Therefore, the principles of res ipsa loquitur (mere occurrence of some types of accident is enough to imply negligence) must be made applicable in cases of this nature.”

“If the concerned department of the government is also made as an accused for having instigated/stimulated a person to commit a crime, ultimately at the time of imposing punishment, the Court can order for adequate compensation to the victim in exercise of its powers under Section 357 of CrPC. This is the only way in which the government can be made to pay for its questionable policy which has resulted in the increasing crimes in the state,” Justice Anand Venkatesh said.

Further, noting that the traditional outlook of the offence of abatement may not strictly encompass within itself the issue which is now attempted to be addressed, the judge said “However, law must evolve, and it can never remain static and become stale. Law must be dynamic, and it must be elastic enough to meet the need of the hour. The exercise done by this Court in this issue is to meet this objective by making a march in law.”

Since, this issue has cropped up for the first time, this Court wants to take the assistance of the Bar and wants to give an opportunity to the State to explain its position before coming to a final conclusion, Justice Anand Venkatesh added while directing the registry to send a copy of this order to all the associations to enable the advocates to make their submissions and assist this Court in this regard. The case has been posted for further hearing to April 4.