Patna: Barely three months after the NDA govt returned to power with a historic mandate, CM Nitish Kumar faces pressure from allies seeking a review of the decade-old total prohibition law, which made the state dry and left more than 8 lakh people facing litigation.The debate gained momentum on Wednesday when HAM-S founder and Union minister Jitan Ram Manjhi strongly backed a review, claiming most victims of the ban belonged to deprived sections and that the policy was causing significant revenue loss. On Tuesday, an RLM legislator had also sought review of liquor ban in the state.“Prohibition is causing significant financial losses to the Bihar govt, and Nitish Kumar should address this,” Manjhi told the reporters in Gaya on Wednesday, adding, “Sharabbandi to ho nahi rahi hai… home delivery ho raha hai (Liquor ban is not being enforced in the state; instead, home delivery is taking place).”Seeking an immediate review, Manjhi cited that deprived sections alone faced 3.5 to 4 lakh cases out of over 8 lakh prohibition-related cases pending in courts. “But what is more alarming, it is mainly the spurious liquor which is reaching Bihar and killing the poor since they are available at a cheap rate,” he alleged, adding such liquor was shortening their longevity and making them prone to diseases.He said the liquor policy was not wrong but flawed in implementation. “Prohibition should be implemented. However, there are flaws in its implementation. That is why we were repeatedly telling Nitish about its review,” he said, alleging enforcement officers were arresting poor individuals while “those who do large-scale smuggling are being let off after taking money.”A day earlier, RLM headed by Rajya Sabha member Upendra Kushwaha made a similar demand in the House. Party legislator Madhav Anand sought a detailed review, though the govt rejected it. “The law was passed but the liquor is available through home delivery,” Anand said, adding the state had also lost revenue. He raised the issue in the presence of Nitish.The JD(U), however, termed the demand “ridiculous”, saying the law was passed after consensus. “First, all parties reached a consensus and then they took a pledge on the floor of the House. So, review for what?” asked JD(U) spokesperson Neeraj Kumar. He claimed public confidence had grown after prohibition and women were scripting new chapters of development.
