Maharashtra’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has moved the Vimal Elaichi advertising controversy involving actors Ajay Devgn, Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff to the adjudication stage, after completing its initial proceedings. FDA Commissioner Tukaram Munde said the department would continue with the process despite Devgn approaching the Bombay High Court to challenge the show-cause notice issued to him.
The FDA alleges that advertisements for Vimal Elaichi amount to surrogate or indirect promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, which is prohibited in Maharashtra. Devgn, however, has argued that the notice was arbitrarily issued to him as an actor rather than the manufacturing company and maintains that he endorsed Vimal Elaichi, not pan masala. The Bombay High Court is likely to hear his petition on November 4.
Proceedings Move Forward
The FDA’s initial proceedings against all three actors have now been completed. According to Munde, the actors had responded to the show-cause notices and sought time for hearings, which was granted. The Assistant Commissioner, acting as the designated authority at the initial stage, subsequently completed the proceedings. The matter has now been forwarded to the Joint Commissioner, who is the competent authority to conduct the adjudication.
Speaking about Devgn’s decision to approach the High Court, Munde said the FDA would not halt its process. “Even if the concerned person has moved the High Court, we have already started adjudicating proceedings and will proceed in accordance with the law,” he told ANI on November 1. The statement indicates that, unless the court issues an order affecting the proceedings, the regulatory process will continue before the Joint Commissioner.
What FDA Alleges
The controversy centres on advertisements for Vimal Elaichi, a cardamom-flavoured mouth freshener. The Maharashtra FDA alleges that the use of the Vimal brand name, along with the advertising campaign’s presentation and brand identity, amounts to surrogate advertising for Vimal Pan Masala. The regulator has linked the brand to pan masala and gutkha products prohibited in Maharashtra and has questioned whether the ostensibly different product is being used to reinforce consumer recognition of the prohibited product.
The FDA had asked the actors to explain their association with the advertisements and provide details including their endorsement arrangements and the due diligence they undertook before agreeing to promote the product. It also directed them to discontinue participation in the promotional campaign and sought information concerning the independent existence and marketing of Vimal Elaichi. These remain regulatory allegations and proceedings; no final adjudication holding the actors liable has been reported.
Devgn Challenges Notice
Devgn has separately challenged the FDA’s show-cause notice before the Bombay High Court. His petition argues that the notice was arbitrarily directed at him in his capacity as an actor instead of being issued to the manufacturing company. He has also maintained that his endorsement was for Vimal Elaichi and not Vimal Pan Masala. According to his petition, the FDA had effectively reached a conclusion before giving him an opportunity to respond, which he alleges violates principles of natural justice.
The petition is likely to be heard on November 4 by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna. Devgn is currently the only one among the three actors who has approached the High Court, according to Munde. Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff have also received notices in connection with the same advertising campaign, but the regulatory proceedings against them are continuing through the adjudication process.
Earlier Legal Challenge
The dispute had earlier reached the Delhi High Court after PB Agro LLP, the master licensee associated with the Vimal brand’s manufacture and sale of elaichi and pan masala products without tobacco, challenged the Maharashtra FDA’s notices. In September, the Delhi High Court dismissed the plea on territorial-jurisdiction grounds, holding that the courts in Maharashtra were the more appropriate and convenient forum for challenging action taken by the Maharashtra regulator.
The latest developments therefore leave two processes running in parallel: the FDA’s adjudication before its Joint Commissioner and Devgn’s challenge before the Bombay High Court. The court’s response could determine whether the regulatory proceedings can continue in their present form, while the FDA maintains that it is acting within its legal powers.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Celebrity endorsements can shape consumer behaviour, particularly when a familiar brand identity is associated with products that raise public-health concerns. At the same time, regulatory allegations should not be treated as established guilt before the prescribed legal process is completed.
The FDA must ensure that its proceedings remain transparent, evidence-based and fair, while celebrities and brands should exercise meaningful due diligence before promoting products whose branding may overlap with restricted or harmful goods. A balanced approach can protect public health while respecting due process. Should celebrities face greater responsibility for examining the wider brand associations of products they endorse?
Also Read: How a Mumbai Architect Turns Air Pollution Into Sustainable Building Tiles
