The Supreme Court of India, on January 19, 2026, issued a stay on the Rajasthan High Court's directive that mandated the removal or relocation of all liquor shops situated within 500 meters of national and state highways across Rajasthan. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard multiple petitions challenging the High Court's order, including those filed by liquor vendors and the Rajasthan government itself. The Rajasthan High Court's November 2025 order was a response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in 2023, which highlighted an alarming increase in fatal road accidents attributed to drunk driving in the state. The High Court had severely criticized the state government for allegedly turning highways into "liquor-friendly corridors" and had directed the removal of approximately 1,102 liquor outlets, irrespective of whether they fell within municipal or local body limits. This directive contradicted a crucial clarification issued by the Supreme Court in 2017, which had exempted licensed liquor establishments within municipal areas from the original 2016 ban on liquor sales along highways (State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu). During the Supreme Court proceedings, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing some petitioners, argued that the High Court had issued a sweeping, state-wide order without granting a proper hearing to all affected parties. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Rajasthan government, also supported the petitioners' stance, emphasizing that the High Court had misinterpreted the apex court's earlier clarification regarding municipal areas. While acknowledging the "absolutely genuine" concern of the Rajasthan High Court regarding road safety and the rising number of deaths, the Supreme Court bench noted that the wide-ranging directions required closer judicial scrutiny. The apex court decided to stay the operation of the High Court's order, effectively putting a hold on the removal of these liquor shops until further review. The court highlighted the necessity of balancing public safety considerations with fiscal aspects and the commercial interests of the affected businesses. This interim order provides a temporary reprieve to the liquor vendors and allows for a more detailed examination of the legal precedents and the practical implications of the High Court's blanket ban.