Death count in the adulterated/fake liquor consumption incident at Balupur, Haridwar, Uttarakhand has reached 34. Is it time to re-look into DRY AREA concept?

The death count in the adulterated/fake liquor consumption incident at a village in Uttarakhand’s Haridwar has reached 34, officials said Friday. At least 40 others needed medical treatment. Most of the victims had consumed the liquor Thursday evening at the ‘tehravin’ (death mourning meal), after a relative’s death in Balupur village, said officials. Is it time to re-look into DRY AREA concept?

It is often debated by very well-meaning individuals as to why there must be NO dry areas in any district.

In simple words, MAKING any area a DRY Area (where there is a complete ban on the sale of liquor and other intoxicants) for any religious or other reasons DOES NOT make any sense.

The recent adulterated liquor incident once again shows that a DRY AREA does not prohibit liquor consumption. It simply encourages the sale and consumption of liquor, sub-quality liquor and adulterated liquor ILLEGALY.

Other disadvantages of putting a complete ban on liquor sale in an area:

It encourages corruption in departments related to sale of liquor.

It decreases Policing and monitoring activities -- Because the administration assumes that the practice does not exist in the area.

It encourages consumption of other intoxicants.

It increases black-marketing of liquor.

It increases the hardships for the families of those addicted to liquor because now the consumer spends more money to buy the same quantity.

To conclude, instead of making DRY AREAS, people must recognize the practice of liquor consumption among them. It is necessary because living in a DRY AREA does not mean people will not drink. It only means that those who do not drink see their locality as bad habits (in their minds) free. 

----