Council for Harm Reduced Alternatives v. State of Karnataka

Council for Harm Reduced Alternatives (Council) challenged a June 15, 2016 Government of Karnataka circular that prohibits the manufacture, sale, distribution, trade, import, and advertisement of e-cigarettes.  Public health group, Verve Foundation Trust, intervened.  At an initial hearing, the court refused to stay implementation of the circular.  In a subsequent hearing, the court observed, "it is expressly clear that the petitioner which is . . . claiming to act in public interest is in fact espousing the cause of manufacturing units of ENDS."  The court further stated that the petitioner has abused the court's jurisdiction and wants only to lift Karnataka's ban on e-cigarettes to ensure that manufacturing companies are benefited.  Without ruling on the merits of the ban, the court accordingly dismissed the litigation and imposed costs on the Council in the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

Council for Harm Reduced Alternatives v. State of Karnataka, Writ Petition 36696 of 2017, High Court of Karnataka (2019).

  • India
  • Aug 27, 2019
  • High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff Council for Harm Reduced Alternatives

Defendant State of Karnataka

Third Party

  • Verve Foundation Trust

Legislation Cited

Karnataka ENDS Ban

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

None

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

"Thus, it is expressly clear that the petitioner, which is claiming to be a Section 8 company and is claiming to act in public interest is in fact espousing the cause of manufacturing units of ENDS. The petitioner who claims to act in public interest is worried more about the loss to the manufacturers rather than the harm to public health. The orders on which reliance is placed have been passed at the instance of the manufacturers of ENDS. Apart from the fact that it can be inferred the petitioner is espousing the cause of manufacturers of ENDS, when the petitioner itself has admitted that ENDS is harmful, it is impossible to accept that public interest is involved in seeking removal of bans on e-cigarettes."