“Is that Apple Juice or…?” Supreme Court Grills State on Liquor Tetra Packs || Lawyer Talks

Table of Contents

The Headline:

In a move that has parents concerned and back-benchers nervous, the Supreme Court has raised a serious eyebrow at the sale of liquor in tetra packs. The Bench questioned the rationale behind allowing alcohol to be packaged in small, cardboard cartons—indistinguishable from fruit juice—noting that it makes access dangerously easy for school children.

The Core Issue: “Should This Be Permitted?”

The Supreme Court was hearing a plea challenging the policy of certain state governments (primarily Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka) allowing the sale of country liquor and IMFL (Indian Made Foreign Liquor) in 180ml tetra packs.

The primary concern raised by the Bench was stealth and accessibility. Unlike a glass bottle, which clinks, breaks, and is visibly “alcohol,” a tetra pack looks innocent. The Court observed that these packs are small, easy to hide, and look suspiciously like the mango or apple drinks found in every child’s lunchbox.

The Court’s Observation:

“How do you distinguish this from a juice box? A student can easily put this in their school bag, insert a straw, and nobody would know the difference. Should this be permitted?”

The Lighter Side: Courtroom Banter & “High” Schools

While the issue regarding minors is grave, the exchange in the courtroom had its moments of wit as the Bench tried to understand the logistics of “stealth drinking.”

1. The “Fruity” Confusion

When the State counsel argued that tetra packs are eco-friendly and prevent adulteration, one of the Justices quipped about the packaging design.

Counsel: “My Lords, it is tamper-proof and easier to handle.”
Bench: “It is so easy to handle that a child can handle it in a classroom! One moment it’s ‘Appy Fizz’, the next moment it’s just ‘Fizz’ without the apple. We cannot have teachers acting as excise inspectors smelling every carton in the lunch break!”

2. The “Straw” Debate

The discussion moved to how these packs are consumed.

Petitioner: “They come with small straws attached, exactly like fruit beverages.”
Bench (smiling): “So, we are providing ‘convenience’ at the cost of ‘conscience’? Usually, people need a glass and water. Here, the State has provided a ready-to-drink solution. It seems the only thing missing is the complimentary peanuts!”

3. The “School Bag” Test

The Bench hypothetically discussed the size of the packs.

Bench: “It fits perfectly in a geometry box or a side pocket. Back in our day, students hid comic books. Now, are we expecting them to hide 180ml of whiskey next to their Tiffin? This gives a whole new meaning to ‘high’ school education.”

The Serious Conclusion

Despite the light-hearted remarks regarding the absurdity of the situation, the Supreme Court’s stance remained firm. The Bench emphasized that the protection of minors takes precedence over commercial convenience or packaging innovation.

The Court has issued a notice to the State Excise Department, asking them to explain what safeguards are in place to ensure these “juice-box liquors” don’t end up in the hands of minors.

What do you think?

Should alcohol be sold in tetra packs for environmental reasons, or is the risk to children too high? Let us know in the comments!

“Is that Apple Juice or…?” Supreme Court Grills State on Liquor Tetra Packs || Lawyer Talks

“Is that Apple Juice or…?” Supreme Court Grills State on Liquor Tetra Packs || Lawyer Talks

The Headline: