Police can't ban alcohol at concerts while granting noise pollution clearance: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently held that police authorities cannot prohibit the sale or consumption of alcohol at concerts and other events while granting permission under the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. [Atlani Brothers v. State of UP]

A Division Bench of Justices Alok Mathur and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held,

"We further find that there is no provision in the Rules of 2000 with regard to the power and/or scope of permitting or denying the permission for serving of intoxicating products, including alcohol," the Court observed.

The ruling came in a petition filed by Atlani Brothers Live, a proprietorship firm represented by Mamta Atlani, challenging a condition imposed by the Lucknow Police prohibiting alcohol at a live music concert sponsored by Casa Bacardi. The concert was scheduled to take place on October 10, 2026 at Dayal Gateway in Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

On September 30, the Additional Police Commissioner (Law and Order) granted permission for the event subject to 18 conditions, one of which prohibited the serving or consumption of alcohol and other intoxicating substances during the concert.

The organisers challenged the restriction, arguing that the Noise Pollution Rules did not authorise police authorities to impose conditions relating to liquor sales.

They submitted that the event was sponsored by Casa Bacardi, a company engaged in the liquor business and that alcohol was proposed to be sold during the programme. They also pointed out that the police had granted permission for another music concert, Papon Live, in July 2026 without imposing a similar restriction.

The State opposed the petition but could not dispute that the prohibition on alcohol was not a condition prescribed under the Noise Pollution Rules.

The Court observed that while the police could impose conditions relating to sound levels, there was no provision empowering them to regulate the serving of intoxicating substances.

The Bench also found that the organisers had been discriminated against because similar restrictions had not been imposed at other concerts.

Advocates Suryansh Narula, Ankit Verma and Pali Anurag appeared for the petitioner.

[Read Judgment]