Patna: Nearly a decade after prohibition was imposed in April 2016, the politics around the policy has entered a sharper and more complex phase with renewed demands for review emerging even as the govt signals firm continuity. What began as a flagship social reform under former CM Nitish Kumar is now being tested against administrative realities, economic pressures and a growing chorus of political voices questioning its impact.The latest round of statements reflects a pattern of periodic dissent cutting across party lines. While earlier objections were often cautious or limited, recent interventions suggest a widening space for more direct political articulation on the issue.Amid this churn, CM Samrat Choudhary last week made it clear the govt is not inclined to dilute or scrap the policy. “PM Narendra Modi and (former CM) Nitish Kumar support it (prohibition policy). In fact, the PM had said at Patna that prohibition was the best decision of Nitish as CM,” Samrat said while addressing a meeting. He added, “However, we will make a crackdown on illegal liquor trade, especially spurious liquor that has caused several hooch tragedies in recent years.”Samrat’s assertion comes at a time when pressure has begun to build from within the ruling ecosystem itself. Rashtriya Lok Morcha MLA Madhaw Anand met Samrat on April 16 seeking a review of the policy, arguing that its current form has led to unintended consequences. He pointed to the increasing use of drugs among youths and suggested that revenue generated from lifting the ban could be channelled into development activities.A day later, JD(U) MLA Anant Singh also demanded that the policy be scrapped. Such interventions are significant as they point to a gap between the official position and the ground-level perception of the policy’s effectiveness.On April 19, Union minister and Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) founder Jitan Ram Manjhi reiterated his long-standing concerns, focusing on its social and economic fallout. He said 4.5 lakh people, largely from poorer sections, had been arrested under prohibition laws, while more affluent groups continued to access liquor through smuggling networks. Referring to the dangers of illicit liquor, he said it was “prepared in two hours by mixing urea fertilizer,” often leading to deaths and serious health complications. “Samrat has just taken charge as CM. In the near future, I hope that he will definitely review the policy,” Manjhi had told reporters.These statements reflect a broader strand of opinion which argues that while the intent behind prohibition may have been socially driven, its implementation has created parallel challenges, including illegal trade, enforcement burden and loss of revenue for a cash-strapped state exchequer.The political history of opposition to prohibition also shows how the issue has evolved. The first major challenge came in Dec 2017, when Manjhi raised objections, even citing cultural practices linked to his community. In Dec 2020, Congress legislature party leader Ajeet Sharma wrote to the CM seeking scrapping of the policy and diversion of potential revenue towards industrial development. The issue resurfaced prominently during the Kurhani bypoll in 2022, when it became a factor in political mobilisation, and again in 2025, before gaining fresh traction during the recent budget session and subsequent developments.Despite these recurring waves of dissent, the core position of the ruling dispensation has remained largely unchanged. The policy continues to be framed as a moral and social commitment, particularly in relation to its perceived benefits for women and vulnerable sections. At the same time, there are indications that even within supporting parties, there is a quiet acknowledgement of the need to address its operational challenges.For now, the state finds itself balancing between public endorsement of prohibition and an undercurrent of political and administrative questioning. With the voices growing more candid, the debate appears to be shifting from whether prohibition should exist to how sustainable its present form remains in the years ahead.
