S.J.J. Exports Company v. Food Safety Commissioner
A company that exports gutkha challenged the seizure of its products by the Indian government. The company argued that the ban on gutkha and pan masala applied only to the manufacture, storage, and sale of the products within the State of Maharasthra and not to the export of such products. The court ruled that the Indian Food Safety and Standards Act prohibits both the manufacture and export of gutkha that contains tobacco.
S.J.J. Exports Company v. Food Safety Commissioner, W.P. No. 2266 of 2012, High Court of Judicature at Bombay (2013).
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.
Government, through its agencies and officials including prosecutors, may seek to enforce its health laws. For example, the government may revoke the license of a retailer that sells tobacco products to minors. These cases may also directly involve the tobacco industry, for example, a government might impound and destroy improperly labeled cigarette packs.
A violation of the right to carry on trade, business, or profession of a person’s choice. This right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom. The industry may argue that a business should be able to conduct its business without government regulation, including whether or not to be smoke free.
Any violation of a law designed to ensure fair trade, competition, or the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. For example, a government may require businesses to disclose detailed information about products—particularly in areas where safety or public health is an issue.
Tobacco products that are used by means other than smoking, such as chewing, sniffing, or placing between the teeth and gum. Examples include chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snuf, snus, gutkha or gutka, and dissolvable tobacco products.
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
"Offending of this type and to this extent is particularly serious for a number of reasons. First, there is clearly a substantial loss to the Exchequer, both in relation to the stated loss of duty and tax, as well as the loss of tax and rates generated though the legitimate taxation of genuine wholesale and retail outlets. Secondly, there is a strong health and social policy behind the imposition of tax and duty on cigarettes, primarily to deter purchase of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Evasion of the duty undermines this policy. Thirdly, the sale of cigarettes through genuine retail outlets is regulated to prevent sale to under aged consumers. Fourthly, the profitability of the genuine retail outlets is substantially undermined by this illegal activity. Fifthly, the unregulated importation of illicit cigarettes bypasses the normal quality control provisions and may expose the ultimate user to not only the well-known and documented adverse impact from tobacco and nicotine consumption, but other toxic additives. Finally, this criminal activity at this scale is normally associated with criminal elements in society who are closely associated with major criminal gangs, many with a direct or indirect link with paramilitary groups. The World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control adopted a new treaty in November 2012, and its representative stated – “The elimination of all forms of illicit trade in tobacco products, including smuggling and illegal manufacturing, is an essential component of tobacco control…….Illicit trade in tobacco products is a global problem. It undermines health objectives, imposes additional strain on health systems and weakens tax and other measures designed to strengthen tobacco control. It leads to substantial revenue losses to governments around the world but generates vast financial profits for illegal traders. These are often used to fund transnational criminal activity.” There is a clear public interest in suppressing this type of activity."
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
A company that exports gutkha challenged the seizure of its products by the Indian government. The company argued that the ban on gutkha and pan masala applied only to the manufacture, storage, and sale of the products within the State of Maharasthra and not to the export of such products. The court ruled that the Indian Food Safety and Standards Act prohibits both the manufacture and export of gutkha that contains tobacco.