The Kerala High Court recently observed that lawmakers should consider amending laws dealing with minors and children in conflict with the law and reduce the age threshold to 16 years for 18 years, taking into account the increasing maturity of children at that age [Vinod Vikrama Pillai v State of Kerala & ors].
Justice A Badharudeen made the observation on November 13 while considering a petition concerning the failure of authorities to prevent the sale and supply of liquor to persons below 23 years of age.
"That apart, it is high time for the legislatures to consider appropriate amendments in the statutes which deal with the ‘juveniles and child in conflict’ with law to reduce age to 16 years, taking note of the present trend showing sufficient maturity by children when they reach the age of 16," the Court observed.
The petition was filed by journalist Vinod Vikraman Pillai, who alleged that licensed establishments were serving liquor to underage persons in violation of Sections 15A and 15B of the Kerala Abkari Act.
Section 15A prohibits persons below the age of 23 from consuming liquor, while Section 15B restricts licensed establishments from selling or supplying liquor to them.
He contended that the authorities had a statutory duty to enforce these restrictions and that the continued supply of alcohol to underage persons amounted to a failure in discharging their duty.
The petitioner referred to recent incidents in which persons below the age of 18 had caused fatal road accidents and other motor vehicle mishaps after consuming alcohol.
He highlighted the fatal accident at Nedumbassery involving a Mini Cooper, which was driven by a 19-year-old, under the influence of alcohol.
The plea stated that the easy availability of liquor for minors despite existing restrictions posed a serious threat to public safety.
Pillai further added that he had submitted a representation on October 15, to the Excise Commissioner and the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) Director seeking mandatory electronic age verification systems at bars, action against establishments violating the law and even investigation into excise officials suspected of taking bribes from bar establishments.
When no effective action was taken on his representation, he approached the Court seeking directions to enforce the statutory restrictions and investigate the alleged lapses.
Considering these concerns, the Court observed that the matter required a detailed hearing and posted it to November 24.
In the mean time, it directed the Excise Commissioner to file a statement detailing the directions already issued to implement Sections 15A and 15B of the Kerala Abkari Act.
The Court also sought suggestions on further measures that could be adopted to ensure effective enforcement of these restrictions in order to protect the public from danger.
Advocate U Jayakrishnan appeared for the petitioner.
[Read Order]