United Spirits, Bacardi India and John Distilleries have moved the Bombay High Court against Maharashtra’s Maharashtra-Made Liquor (MML) policy, alleging that it unfairly excludes several players from the new category, as per Bar and Bench.
The companies are challenging a government order issued on August 7, 2025, which defines eligibility for manufacturing MML, and have sought its scrapping or removal of what they call discriminatory conditions.
Financialexpress.com could not independently verify this news.
‘Exclusionary’ rules at the heart of the dispute
At the centre of the dispute are the policy’s eligibility rules. The companies say these rules create a “privileged” group of Potable Liquor Licence (PLL) holders who alone can manufacture MML.
They argue this is unfair because other PLL holders, including them, already operate distilleries in Maharashtra but are still being left out. According to the companies, these conditions are restrictive and unfairly limit competition in the industry, Bar and Bench added.
What is the MML policy?
Maharashtra-Made Liquor (MML) was brought in under the broader umbrella of excise haul. This will be grain-based alcohol produced exclusively by local manufacturers, who will be required to register fresh brands under this segment.
While it will follow the lower tax structure typically applied to country liquor, its sale will be restricted to licensed outlets such as FL-2 (retail shops selling sealed liquor) and FL-3 (hotels and restaurants).
The state noted this to be a way to expand revenue while giving a boost to local manufacturing, stating that the segment could grow from the current 5–6 crore litres to 10–11 crore litres and generate up to Rs 3,000 crore in additional excise collections, as per media reports.
In the months that followed, the government raised excise duty on Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL), defined the MML category, and set pricing and duty structures before formalising the rules in August.
Companies allege violation of equality
The petitioners have argued that the policy violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. They contend that there is no clear or reasonable basis for distinguishing between eligible and ineligible PLL holders, Bar and Bench added.
According to them, the policy doesn’t match the government’s stated goals of boosting revenue, investment, or jobs. Instead, they say it unfairly leaves out some players without a clear reason.
Concerns over trade restrictions
The companies have also argued that the policy unfairly restricts trade. They have asked the court to allow their applications for making and labelling MML to be processed without applying the disputed eligibility rules.
Earlier challenge and state’s defence
This is not the first legal challenge to the MML policy. The International Spirits and Wine Association of India (ISWA), which represents several global liquor companies, had earlier approached the court on similar grounds, Bar and Bench added.
In its defence, the Maharashtra government said the policy is aimed at supporting local manufacturers. It also pointed to a 17% rise in excise revenue between July and November 2025, stating it happened because of the duty hikes and the rollout of MML. Earlier, while hearing a similar plea, the Bombay High Court had allowed the state to go ahead with preparatory steps in November 2025, but said these would be subject to the final verdict.