Delhi High Court Dismisses PB Agro's Plea Against FDA Notices to Bollywood Stars
Court Ruling on Surrogate Advertisement Case
File image shows Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff in a commercial ad for Vimal Pan Masala(Photo: X)
New Delhi, Sep 15: The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition from PB Agro, the firm linked to Vimal Elaichi, which contested show-cause notices issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, and Tiger Shroff regarding an alleged surrogate advertisement for Vimal pan masala.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ruled that the case did not fall under the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court, suggesting that Maharashtra would be a more suitable venue for addressing the concerns related to the FDA's notices.
The court pointed out that PB Agro did not demonstrate that any significant part of the issue arose in Delhi. The company claimed that the Delhi High Court should have jurisdiction since it is based in the capital and that the advertising campaign was developed there. They also mentioned that payments to the actors were processed from Delhi.
Nonetheless, the court dismissed these arguments, clarifying that the show-cause notices were not directed at PB Agro itself, and the company had not been asked to respond, remove any ads, or present documents to the Maharashtra FDA.
This dispute centers on the notices sent by the Maharashtra FDA to the actors concerning the alleged surrogate promotion of Vimal pan masala, with the actors being featured in advertisements for Vimal Elaichi, a product of PB Agro.
Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court had reserved its decision on the jurisdictional matter after hearing PB Agro's plea to annul the FDA's show-cause notices.
During the proceedings, PB Agro argued that the notices were issued solely to the actors, even though the company could face significant damage from any actions regarding the advertisement. They also claimed that the Maharashtra FDA did not have the authority to issue directives to stop the advertisement.
In contrast, the Centre and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) opposed the petition's validity in the Delhi High Court, asserting that PB Agro should have approached the Bombay High Court since the actions in question were taken by the Maharashtra FDA.
The CCPA noted that while it was reviewing the matter independently, it had no objections to the Maharashtra FDA's issuance of the notices.