Show summary Hide summary
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has defended the continued operation of liquor outlets in Jammu and Kashmir, saying they serve only those whose faith permits alcohol and insisting the administration is not promoting drinking. His comments come as the lieutenant governor’s 100-day Nasha Mukt J&K Abhiyan intensifies enforcement and stimuli a broader debate over policing, property seizures and community sensitivities.
Omar Abdullah’s clarification
Speaking a day after remarks drew criticism, Abdullah argued the shops are legal venues for people permitted by their religion to buy alcohol and that no one is being compelled to patronize them. He reiterated that his government has not expanded the network of outlets and said officials have tried to avoid siting shops where they could unduly influence young people.
May Sahitya Mela faces writers’ outcry over rising far-right threats
Modi lands in Italy as Meloni talks, IMEC pacts and FAO strategy drive agenda
Abdullah also suggested questions about the anti-drug drive should be addressed to the lieutenant governor, who launched the campaign on April 11. He said his earlier statement had been misunderstood and pointed out that similar positions had been recorded in the assembly during the previous Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) tenure.
Political pushback and religious sensitivities
The PDP’s Iltija Mufti criticized the chief minister’s remarks as insensitive to the majority community’s concerns, arguing that several religiously conservative states have managed liquor restrictions without the sort of laxity she attributed to Abdullah. Her intervention framed the issue as both a matter of policy and of public sentiment.
Other critics accuse political rivals of twisting the CM’s comments for partisan gain; Abdullah says opponents have a tendency to distort straightforward statements.
What the anti-drug campaign has done so far
The lieutenant governor’s 100-day push aims to curb drug supply and consumption through a mix of enforcement and awareness. The administration highlights measurable results, while some ministers and civil society figures question specific tactics.
- Registered cases: 614 FIRs filed
- Arrests: 646 people taken into custody
- Awareness outreach: 216,123 programmes across Jammu and Kashmir
- Drug network actions: 435 peddlers apprehended; 160 hotspots identified
- Property measures: 37 houses demolished; immovable assets worth ₹25.97 crore attached
Demolitions and calls for restraint
Not all officials back the heavy-handed elements of the campaign. Health Minister Sakina Itoo has publicly questioned the demolition of homes, arguing the response appears concentrated in Kashmir despite data she says show addiction rates are higher in parts of Jammu.
“If a child is addicted, the priority should be rehabilitation,” she told reporters, adding that seizing family property or demolishing a house in the name of cracking down on trafficking raises legal and ethical concerns.
Her remarks underscore a core tension: how to balance robust action against traffickers with respect for property rights and due process — and how to ensure measures do not alienate communities the campaign seeks to protect.
Why this matters now
The dispute touches on several volatile issues at once: religious sensibilities, the limits of administrative power, and the political fallout of an aggressive anti-drug drive. With the 100-day window still unfolding, the shape and tone of enforcement will influence public trust and the campaign’s long-term effectiveness.
Officials say the aim is to make Jammu and Kashmir drug-free, but the outcomes — from arrests to demolitions — will be scrutinized by residents, opposition parties and rights advocates alike.
How authorities reconcile enforcement with rehabilitation, and whether the lieutenant governor’s office addresses concerns about targeting and property rights, will determine whether the campaign is seen as legitimate reform or as uneven, potentially politicized action.
