<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Centre and others on a plea seeking an immediate ban on the sale of alcohol in "inconspicuous" packaging formats such as tetra packs, sachets and other portable containers.</p><p>A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi sought a response from the Union government and others after hearing advocate Vipin Nair, who represented the petitioner 'Community Against Drunken Driving'.</p><p>The counsel said that definition of bottle was "vague" under the excise regime and needed some standardisation.</p><p>The plea challenged the broad and varying definitions of “bottling” and “bottle” under different state excise acts, which permitted <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/alcohol">alcohol</a> to be packaged in receptacles described as “flasks,” “pots,” “baskets,” “wrappers,” and other similar containers.</p>.Supreme Court refuses to consider plea against ban on sale of liquor in tetra pack in Uttar Pradesh.<p>The plea said that it is alarming to note that these tetra packs are marketed under labels such as “Bunty Premium Vodka,” “Chelli Mango Vodka,” and “Premium Romanov Vodka – Apple Thrill,” clearly intended to mislead consumers.</p><p>“The use of fruit names alongside colour photographs of apples and mangoes on the packaging further reinforces this deception. This reflects a deliberate marketing strategy to pass off alcoholic beverages as fruit juices, thereby to evade scrutiny by the authorities and further target underage consumers,” the counsel said.</p><p>The plea questioned the extent of discretion exercised by state excise authorities in permitting varied forms of <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/liquor">liquor</a> packaging and sought a uniform regulatory framework guided by public health and safety considerations.</p><p>The petitioner sought uniform and harmonised guidelines governing the packaging of liquor across states, raising concerns relating to underage drinking, drunk driving, public consumption, and public health.</p><p>The plea contended these packages posed various risks, including consumption by juveniles, drinking in a moving vehicle, health risks, increased ease of smuggling, ease of public consumption, and environmental risks. </p>.'Can enable children to carry alcohol to schools': Supreme Court questions sale of liquor in tetra packs.<p>“Moreover, these tetra packs have attractive packaging with vivid colours but do not have prominent health warnings like in the case of cigarettes, which would dissuade people from drunken driving and responsible drinking. The warning, if any, is only in small fine print, which would be hardly visible or discernible to a consumer,” the plea stated.</p><p>It also said such packaging, being deceptively similar to fruit juices, facilitated easy access and concealment, encourages underage consumption, promotes public drinking and drunk driving, and even enables smuggling across state borders. </p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Centre and others on a plea seeking an immediate ban on the sale of alcohol in "inconspicuous" packaging formats such as tetra packs, sachets and other portable containers.</p><p>A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi sought a response from the Union government and others after hearing advocate Vipin Nair, who represented the petitioner 'Community Against Drunken Driving'.</p><p>The counsel said that definition of bottle was "vague" under the excise regime and needed some standardisation.</p><p>The plea challenged the broad and varying definitions of “bottling” and “bottle” under different state excise acts, which permitted <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/alcohol">alcohol</a> to be packaged in receptacles described as “flasks,” “pots,” “baskets,” “wrappers,” and other similar containers.</p>.Supreme Court refuses to consider plea against ban on sale of liquor in tetra pack in Uttar Pradesh.<p>The plea said that it is alarming to note that these tetra packs are marketed under labels such as “Bunty Premium Vodka,” “Chelli Mango Vodka,” and “Premium Romanov Vodka – Apple Thrill,” clearly intended to mislead consumers.</p><p>“The use of fruit names alongside colour photographs of apples and mangoes on the packaging further reinforces this deception. This reflects a deliberate marketing strategy to pass off alcoholic beverages as fruit juices, thereby to evade scrutiny by the authorities and further target underage consumers,” the counsel said.</p><p>The plea questioned the extent of discretion exercised by state excise authorities in permitting varied forms of <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/liquor">liquor</a> packaging and sought a uniform regulatory framework guided by public health and safety considerations.</p><p>The petitioner sought uniform and harmonised guidelines governing the packaging of liquor across states, raising concerns relating to underage drinking, drunk driving, public consumption, and public health.</p><p>The plea contended these packages posed various risks, including consumption by juveniles, drinking in a moving vehicle, health risks, increased ease of smuggling, ease of public consumption, and environmental risks. </p>.'Can enable children to carry alcohol to schools': Supreme Court questions sale of liquor in tetra packs.<p>“Moreover, these tetra packs have attractive packaging with vivid colours but do not have prominent health warnings like in the case of cigarettes, which would dissuade people from drunken driving and responsible drinking. The warning, if any, is only in small fine print, which would be hardly visible or discernible to a consumer,” the plea stated.</p><p>It also said such packaging, being deceptively similar to fruit juices, facilitated easy access and concealment, encourages underage consumption, promotes public drinking and drunk driving, and even enables smuggling across state borders. </p>