What are the sections and the provisions for penalties? What are the provisions for responding? Will the actors have to appear in person to explain their stance to the FDA? After being in the news for a crackdown against establishments, why has Tukaram Mundhe now turned to celebrity endorsements? Vinaya Deshpande Pandit explains.

Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration has alleged that the three actors are likely involved in the surrogate promotion of prohibited products. Maharashtra has banned the manufacture, storage, transportation and distribution of Vimal Pan Masala as it is among the list of prohibited products containing tobacco or nicotine, which cause fatal illnesses like cancer.

The FDA has issued notices to actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff, claiming that their brand endorsement of ‘Vimal Elaichi’ misleads consumers or indirectly promotes the brand identity of a prohibited product, which is Vimal Pan Masala. The three actors are the brand endorsers of Vimal Elaichi.

“Considering the nature of the advertisement, the identity of the brand, its presentation, visual elements, dialogue, product name, the market identity of the brand and the context in which the advertisement is presented, a serious question arises as to whether the said advertisement amounts to indirect, surrogate or other forms of promotion of a prohibited/restricted tobacco related product. In particular, if the use of the “VIMAL” brand under the name of Elaichi or a similar product is intended to maintain, reinforce or enhance the brand identity and consumer attraction associated with Pan Masala/tobacco related products, such communication may not merely constitute an advertisement for an independent product, but may amount to indirect or surrogate promotion of a prohibited/restricted product,” the notice has stated.

Which legislations do such advertisements violate?

The FDA has said that such advertisements are in contravention to various sections of the Food Safety and Standards Act of 2006, and the rules and regulations introduced thereafter. This includes Section 24, which provides for restrictions on advertisement and prohibition as to unfair trade practices relating to food, and prohibits advertisements which are misleading.

It says that under the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, the Food Business Operators and marketers are required to be truthful, unambiguous and not misleading. They are also not permitted to make claims which encourage excessive consumption of a particular food.

The FDA has said that the advertisement is in contravention of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restrictions on Sales) Regulations, 2011, which pertain to substances which may be injurious to health. “Pan Masala is a regulated food product under the FSSAI regulatory framework, and compliance with all applicable legal provisions relating to its manufacture, marketing, sale and advertisement is mandatory,” the FDA has said in its notice.

The agency thinks that the particular advertisement also violates the Central Consumer Protection Authority’s 2022 guidelines for the prevention of misleading advertisements and endorsements for misleading advertisements, and the Prohibition of Advertisement under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COPTA, 2003).

What is the penalty for the violating these rules?

Under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Central Consumer Protection Authority is empowered to direct the discontinuation or modification of a false or misleading advertisement, and to impose on the endorser a penalty which may extend to ₹10 Lakh. For subsequent contravention, the fine may extend up to ₹50 Lakh. The Authority is also empowered to prohibit the endorser of a false or misleading advertisement from making endorsement of any product for a period of up to one year. For subsequent contravention, that period may extend to up to three years.

The actors have been asked to respond to the notice within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the notice.

Will the actors have to remain present in person to respond to the notices?

No. They can can submit a written explanation either in person or through a duly authorised representative. They will have to send the explanation along with the documentary evidence. “Should you desire to be heard in person, you may indicate the same in your written explanation, whereupon an opportunity of personal hearing, either in person or through a duly authorised representative, shall be afforded to you, in accordance with the principles of natural justice,” the notice has stated.

What if the actors fail to respond to the notice?

If they fail to respond to the notice within the stipulated time period, or if their response is found unsatisfactory, they might face action under the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Rules and Regulations made thereafter, “without any further reference or notice to you (the actors).” The FDA has said that if they fail to give a satisfactory response, “it shall be presumed that you have nothing to state in the matter.”

Is this the first time that the FDA has issued a notice to celebrities?

No. The Maharashtra FDA has issued notices to celebrities like Govinda, Jackie Shroff, Alok Nath for their role in promoting products with misleading claims.

After a crackdown against establishments, why has Tukaram Mundhe now turned to celebrity endorsements?

The IAS officer has said in his several interactions that he will lead a crackdown against the contravention of laws related to food and drug safety, if they affect consumer health.

Published - August 17, 2026 12:09 pm IST