CCI Orders Investigation into Alleged Exclusive Dealing Arrangements in Delhi’s Liquor Market

On 4 May 2026, the CCI directed the DG to investigate alleged anti-competitive conduct involving liquor manufacturer Pernod Ricard and certain wholesalers and retailers operating in Delhi under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act.²

Allegations of Bid-Rigging and Cartelisation

The information alleged bid-rigging in tenders floated by the Department of Excise, Entertainment and Luxury Tax for the wholesale supply of country liquor in Delhi, as well as broader cartelisation during the implementation of the Delhi Excise Policy, 2021-22.

According to the Informant, manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers coordinated their conduct to:

• Manipulate bids
• Allocate markets
• Influence liquor distribution in Delhi

CCI’s Findings on Bid-Rigging and Horizontal Agreements

The CCI, however, found insufficient material to establish a prima facie case of bid-rigging. While certain tenders had been cancelled due to procedural violations or concerns regarding narrow bid price ranges, the material on record was insufficient to infer collusion.

Allegations of a horizontal agreement between major liquor manufacturers to allocate markets were likewise unsupported by adequate evidence at the prima facie stage.

Concerns Regarding Vertical Arrangements by Pernod Ricard

The CCI nevertheless expressed concern regarding allegations that Pernod Ricard had entered into arrangements with certain wholesalers and retailers to promote its brands and increase market share.

Relevant Market and Market Position

For this purpose, the CCI delineated the relevant market as the market for sale and supply of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in Delhi. It noted that Pernod Ricard had consistently held the highest market share in the broader wines, spirits and liquors segment.

Alleged Exclusive Dealing Conduct

The CCI noted material suggesting that Pernod Ricard may have provided financial support and corporate guarantees to selected retailers and entered into strategic arrangements aimed at securing preferential stocking and promotion of its brands.

Such conduct, according to the CCI, could amount to an exclusive dealing arrangement under Section 3(4)(b) by potentially:

• Foreclosing competing brands
• Distorting consumer choice
• Restricting competition in the Delhi IMFL market

Accordingly, the CCI found a prima facie case under Section 3(4)(b) read with Section 3(1) and directed the DG to investigate the conduct of Pernod Ricard and certain associated wholesalers and retailers.

Business Takeaway

The order highlights the CCI’s continued scrutiny of vertical arrangements that may facilitate market foreclosure. The following types of commercial conduct may attract competition law scrutiny where they limit consumer choice or restrict market access for rivals:

• Financial incentives offered to distributors or retailers
• Preferential supply arrangements
• Commercial strategies that encourage distributors or retailers to favour one supplier over competing brands

Last Updated on 17 July, 2026