TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS

Mahesh Bhatt, et al. v. Union of India & Anr.

A well-known film director challenged the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare rules regarding tobacco products on television and in film.  The petitioner argued that the rule that, among other things, prohibits the display of tobacco products in films and television programs, is unconstitutional.  Kasturi and Sons (a Hindu newspaper in Madras) argued, among other things, that the rule requiring that brand names and logos of tobacco products be cropped in print and electronic media in certain circumstances is beyond the scope of the COTPA.  Noting that freedom of expression cannot be suppressed unless the situation is "pressing and the community interest is endangered," the Court held that the contended parts of the rule violated the Constitution and exceeded the power provided by COTPA to enact implementing rules.  

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT

Mahesh Bhatt, et al. v. Union of India & Anr., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 18761 of 2005, High Court of Delhi at New Delhi (2009).

  • India
  • Jan 23, 2009
  • High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
View Case History

Parties

Plaintiff

  • Kasturi and Sons Ltd.
  • Mahesh Bhatt

Defendant Union of India

Legislation Cited

Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003

Related Documents

Judge Mudgal Opinion Judge Khanna Opinion

Type of Litigation

Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health
Tobacco companies or front groups may challenge any legislative or regulatory measure that affects their business interests. Unlike public interest litigation, these cases seek to weaken health measures. These cases frequently involve the industry proceeding against the government. For example, a group of restaurant owners challenging a smoke free law as unconstitutional.

Tobacco Control Topics

Advertising, Promotion and Sponsorship
Measures restricting any form of direct or indirect tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship. (See FCTC Art. 13)

Substantive Issues

Right to Freedom of Expression
A violation of the right to expression, free speech or similar right to express oneself without limitation or censorship. The industry may claim that a regulation infringes on their right to communicate with customers and the public. Similarly, they may claim that mandated warnings infringe on their freedom to communicate as they desire.
Right to Access to Information
A violation of the public’s right to information. The tobacco industry may claim that advertising, promotion or sponsorship, or packaging regulations limit the industry’s ability to communicate information to their customers and therefore infringes on the customer’s right to receive information, and to distinguish one product from another. Alternatively, public health advocates may claim that tobacco industry misinformation violates their right to accurate information or that government must be transparent in its dealings with the tobacco industry.
Right to Life
A violation of the right to not be killed by another person. Arguments may also be similar or tied to right to health arguments.
Right to Work
A violation of the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
Legal Product
Tobacco is a legal product and the tobacco industry is a legal industry.
Ultra Vires Regulation
Subsequent regulations exceed the scope of the originating law.
Cultural Norms
A discussion on cultural attitudes around tobacco, specifically that tobacco use is an accepted part of the culture.

Type of Tobacco Product

None

1400 I Street N.W.,
Suite 1200,
Washington, DC 20005
United States of America

Phone: (202) 296-5469

Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is a BBB-accredited charity and a
Guidestar Exchange Gold Participant.

© 2025 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids | Trademarks | Copyright | Privacy

Site created and maintained by