The year 2025 is now on the threshold of farewell and preparations to welcome 2026 have intensified. After Christmas, the period of celebration will begin in homes, clubs and pubs on New Year’s night. Liquor lovers also play a big role in this celebration, but the celebration will be fun only if it is within the ambit of law. Therefore, before the New Year, it is important to know the rules of keeping and carrying liquor.

New year, new party and increasing demand for liquor

As the last week of December approaches, the markets become more lively and liquor shops also become crowded. On New Year’s night, people celebrate with friends and family and stock up on liquor in advance. Especially in areas like Delhi, Haryana and UP, people want to know how much liquor is legal to keep at home.

How much liquor can you keep at home in Delhi?

Under the Delhi Excise Act 2009, a person aged 25 years or above can keep a prescribed quantity of liquor in his house. According to the rules, it is legal to possess up to 18 liters of liquor including beer and wine. Whereas for spirits like whiskey, rum, vodka or gin, this limit has been fixed at 9 litres. Delhi High Court has also made it clear that every adult member of the family can consume liquor as per his prescribed limit.

Keep this in mind while going out of Delhi

If you are traveling outside Delhi then the rules for carrying liquor become more strict. While going out of the capital, a person can take only one liter of liquor with him. If a quantity greater than this is found, action may be taken, so keep this rule in mind while planning your trip for the New Year.

Different rules for different categories in Haryana

The rules for possessing liquor in Haryana have been decided according to the category. Here different limits are applicable for Indian liquor, foreign liquor, beer and wine. Apart from this, there are also restrictions on the total number of bottles and the quantity of imported liquor. In such a situation, it becomes necessary to know about the local rules before the party in Haryana.

Strict rules and license option in UP

In Uttar Pradesh, the rules for keeping liquor at home are more strict than in Delhi. Here, one household is allowed to have 1.5 liters of foreign liquor, 1.5 liters of Indian liquor, 6 liters of beer and 2 liters of wine. If someone wants to keep more liquor than this, he will have to take L-50 license. After this license, the limit for possessing foreign liquor increases to 7.5 litres.

Celebrate, but with rules

The arrival of the New Year is an occasion for happiness and celebration, but ignoring the law can turn this happiness into trouble. Therefore, along with preparing for the party, it is equally important to understand the rules related to alcohol. If you celebrate with the right information, then there will be no disruption in your celebration and you will be able to welcome the New Year with joy and enthusiasm and make it a memorable moment by enjoying its celebration with your loved ones.

Also read: Bad news for alcohol drinkers! Even one peg can cause mouth cancer

Adverse possession: Adverse possession is a unique principle of Indian law that allows a person to become the legal owner of a property on which he has been living for a long time without the permission of the original owner. Let us know complete information about this rule.

What is this rule and its legal basis

Under Section 65 of the Limitation Act 1963, the time limit for personal property disputes is 12 years. Which means that if the original owner fails to take back his property within this period or take legal action, he may lose the property to the person who is in possession of it.

In simple words, if a person lives on a land or property continuously, openly and peacefully for 12 years and the original owner does not raise any objection or take any legal action, then the occupier can legally claim ownership.

what are the conditions

In this case the possession should be so clear that the owner of that property is aware of it. At the same time, it should also be uninterrupted and should not be based on violence or confidentiality. When a property owner is aware of encroachment but does not want to take legal action, the encroacher has an even stronger case to make.

Why is this law important for landlords

It is very important for the property owner and landlord to understand adverse possession. Holding a property for years or allowing someone to live there without a valid agreement can result in loss of ownership rights. The court considers continued possession without objection as an indication that the original owner has completely abandoned his interest in the property.

Status of tenants under adverse possession

In most cases, tenants cannot claim ownership through advanced possession because they occupy the property only after the landlord’s permission under a rent or lease agreement. However, when the agreement expires and the tenants continue to live without renewal or objection from the landlord, problems arise. If this situation continues for more than 12 years without any action or written consent, then the tenant’s possession may be considered at an end.

How to protect your property as a landlord

Landlords should always keep tenants under a reasonable rent or lease agreement. Along with this, it should also be updated from time to time. Regular visits and inspections are required to ensure that the property remains under your control.

Keep all ownership records like registry papers, tax receipts and electricity bills in your name only. If you come to know that someone has encroached on your property without permission then immediately file a possession case in the court before the expiry of the period of 12 years.

Read this also: Nothing will happen if you fill 99 oil instead of 100, if you do not check this at the petrol pump then it will be a fraud.

Vande Mataram Controversy: The debate has once again erupted regarding Vande Mataram. Actually, this controversy started in Maharashtra when the state government ordered all schools to sing the full version of Vande Mataram between 31 October and 7 November to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram. After this, Samajwadi Party leader Abu Azmi opposed it. Meanwhile, a big question arose whether someone can be punished for refusing to sing Vande Mataram or not? Let us know what is the answer to this question and also what Indian law says on this issue.

Is there any punishment for not singing Vande Mataram?

According to the Indian Constitution and the policy of the Central Government, there is no legal punishment or provision for not singing Vande Mataram. Singing Vande Mataram is completely voluntary and not mandatory. The government clarified in Parliament that no law makes singing or playing of Vande Mataram mandatory. Along with this, there is no punitive provision related to this.

Constitutional status of Vande Mataram

Although Vande Mataram has the honorary status of the national song of India, it does not have the constitutional status like the national anthem Jana Gana Mana. This means that despite the immense value of patriotism in Vande Mataram, it cannot be implemented legally. Citizens are completely free to express their respect in different ways.

Supreme Court’s stance on compulsion

The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that no one can be forced to sing the national anthem, provided he does not disrespect it and just stands respectfully. Along with this, the court refused to make Vande Mataram mandatory and also emphasized that patriotism cannot be measured by any compulsion. Freedom of expression, protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution, gives individuals complete freedom to choose how they express national honour.

Madras High Court judgment 2017

In 2017, the Madras High Court had directed that Vande Mataram be sung in all schools and government offices in Tamil Nadu. But he also made it clear that if any person or organization has real difficulty or problem then it should not be forced. From this it became clear that this order is advisory and not mandatory.

Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act 1971

The Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act 1971 completely regulates the respect for the national flag and the national anthem, but it does not mention controlling the national anthem. Therefore, refusing to sing Vande Mataram is not a crime.

Also read: Why did Congress ban singing Vande Mataram, over which lines was the dispute?

If there is a property in your child’s name and you handle it as his guardian, can you sell that property? The Supreme Court of India has recently given an important decision on this question. The Court clearly said – If someone wants to sell the property of a Guardian Minor, it is mandatory to take the permission of the Court for this. If the property is sold without permission, then after the minor turns 18 years of age, he can cancel the sale and that too without filing any case. As soon as the minor turns 18, he can either file a suit himself, or by his own conduct – such as selling the same property himself – get the earlier sale declared invalid. This case was from Davanagere district of Karnataka, where a father had sold the property of his three minor sons without the permission of the court. Later, when the sons became adults, they sold the same land again and the Supreme Court legalized their move. Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act also says the same – Guardian cannot sell, gift or give on rent for more than 5 years the immovable property of a Minor without the approval of the Court.

The hearing of the case related to the Special Register of Indian (SIR) has started in Bihar in the Supreme Court. During this time, senior Congress lawyer Kapil Sibal said that it is very important to decide whether Aadhaar can be recognized as evidence of citizenship or not. He said that some steps being taken by the Election Commission are not in line with the orders of the Supreme Court and it should be given immediate attention.

During the hearing, the judge asked Sibal, “We are unable to understand why you put so much emphasis on the basis of every hearing? Are you considering it as evidence of citizenship?” Kapil Sibal clarified, “We are not saying so, but the court order said that Aadhaar should also be recognized. Taking a decision on this basis should be part of the judicial process.” Kapil Sibal said in front of the court that it is necessary to decide whether the Aadhaar is valid or not. He also questioned the Election Commission and said that the action that the Commission is taking is wrong and the orders of the Supreme Court are not being followed.

During the hearing, the judge asked this question

During the hearing, the judge asked, “We are unable to understand why you are giving so much emphasis on the basis of every hearing? Are you considering it a proof of citizenship?” On this, Sibal clarified that his aim is not to present Aadhaar as a proof of citizenship. He said, “We are not saying so. But the court had earlier ordered that Aadhaar should also be accepted.”

Kapil Sibal gave this argument

Kapil Sibal further said that BLO (BOTH Level Officer) is not accepting this, while he has received its oral order. He told the court that it is necessary to give clear instructions in this case. He further said that the Election Commission has issued a ‘show cause’ notice to those officers who did not accept Aadhaar. He said that the court needs to give clear guidelines so that the order of the Supreme Court can be ensured.

Notice of notice

The judge asked to see the notice. Sibal read it and narrated it. After this, Election Commission lawyer Rakesh Dwivedi explained the situation to the court. He said that the order of the Supreme Court has been widely publicized and people are also uploading copies of Aadhaar online, but clarified that the Commission cannot consider Aadhaar as evidence of citizenship. The judge questioned the topic of the notice that no other documents other than 11 documents could be accepted for citizenship. Dwivedi said that he has to see this, because he does not have the notice of another party.

“Aadhaar will be considered a proof of identity”

The judge clarified that in addition to passport and birth certificate, no other documents of 11 documents can be considered as evidence of citizenship. Sibal proposed that Aadhaar should be declared as 12th document. The judge said, “Aadhaar is not a proof of citizenship, but under the Representation of the Public Representation Act, it can be recognized as evidence of identity.”

Also read-

‘Full arrangement of food, treatment and security …’, India told Belgium Court where and how will Mehul Choksi be?