Supreme Court of India
INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
- Citation
- 2024 INSC 406
- Decided
- 7 May 2024
- Disposal
- Directions issued
Holding
Advertisers, advertising agencies and endorsers are equally responsible for misleading advertisements and must submit a self‑declaration under Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 before any advertisement is aired or published.
Summary
The Indian Medical Association filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking redress for the proliferation of misleading and deceptive advertisements, particularly in the food and health sectors. The Court examined the responsibilities of manufacturers, service providers, advertisers, advertising agencies, and endorsers under various statutes and the 2022 Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements. It observed that existing regulatory mechanisms were inadequate and directed ministries to file affidavits detailing actions taken since 2018. The Court held that advertisers, agencies and endorsers are equally liable and must submit a self‑declaration, as per Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, before any advertisement is published or broadcast. It also ordered the creation of online portals for uploading such declarations and directed the Food Safety and Standards Authority to furnish data on complaints and penalties. The order culminated in comprehensive directions to strengthen enforcement of consumer rights and the fundamental right to health.
Issues considered
- The extent of liability of advertisers, advertising agencies and endorsers for misleading or deceptive advertisements under existing statutes.
- Whether the existing regulatory framework sufficiently protects consumers from false advertisements in the food and health sectors.
- Whether the Court can, under Article 32, direct the creation of a self‑declaration mechanism and compel ministries to file affidavits to enforce consumer protection.
Legislation cited
- Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules
- Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act
- Cable Television Networks Ruless. Rule 7
- Consumer Protection Acts. Chapter III, s. Section 18
- Drug and Cosmetics Act
- Drug and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act
- Drugs and Cosmetics Ruless. Rule 170
- Food Safety and Standards Acts. Section 50, s. Section 51, s. Section 52, s. Section 53, s. Section 54
Subjects
AdvertisementMisleading advertisementDeceptive advertisementResponsibility and duty of manufacturersService providersAdvertisersAdvertising agenciesEnforcement of the fundamental right to healthAwareness regarding quality of productsSelf-declaration by the advertiser/advertising agencyViolation of the rights of the consumersUnfair trade practices
Judgment
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 375 : 2024 INSC 406
Indian Medical Association & Anr.
v.
Union of India & Ors.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 645 of 2022)
07 May 2024
[Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The number of misleading advertisements that are being
published/displayed with little/nil accountability on the part of the
manufacturers, promoters and advertisers.
Headnotes†
Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements
and Endorsements of Misleading Advertisements, 2022 –
Advertisement – Misleading advertisement – Deceptive
advertisement – Responsibility and duty of manufacturers,
service providers, advertisers and advertising agencies:
Held: Advertisers/advertising agencies and endorsers are equally
responsible for issuing false and misleading advertisements –
Such endorsements that are routinely made by public figures,
influencers, celebrities etc. go a long way in promoting a product –
It is imperative for them to act with a sense of responsibility when
endorsing any product and take responsibility for the same, as
reflected in Guideline No.8 of the Guidelines, 2022 that relates
to advertisements that address/target or use children for various
purposes and Guideline No.12 that lays down the duties of
manufacturers, service providers, advertisers and advertising
agencies to ensure that the trust of the consumer is not abused
or exploited due to sheer lack of knowledge or inexperience –
Guideline No.13 requires a due diligence to be undertaken for
endorsement of advertisements and requires a person who
endorses a product to have adequate information about, or
experience with a specific good, product or service that is proposed
to be endorsed and ensure that it must not be deceptive. [Para 21]
Consumer Protection – Awareness – Food and health sector –
Promote mechanism for consumer complaints:
Held: All the statutory provisions/rules, regulations and guidelines
have a salutary object, which is to serve the consumers and
376 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
ensure that they are made aware of the kind of product that is
being offered for purchase, particularly in the food and health
sector – This Court is of the opinion that the concerned Ministries
ought to set up and promote a mechanism which encourages
the consumer to lodge a complaint and for the said complaint
to be taken to its logical conclusion, instead of simply being
marked/forwarded to the concerned State authority, thus leaving
the consumer clueless as to the final outcome of the complaint
made. [Para 22]
Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 – r.7 – Constitution
of India – Enforcement of the fundamental right to health –
Awareness regarding quality of products – Self-declaration
by the advertiser/advertising agency:
Held: In the absence of any robust mechanism enacted in law
to ensure that the obligations cast on the advertiser to adhere
to stipulations in the Guidelines, 2022 in letter and spirit, it is
deemed appropriate to invoke the powers vested in this Court
under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement
of the fundamental right to health that encompasses the right of
a consumer to be made aware of the quality of products being
offered for sale by manufacturers, service providers, advertisers
and advertising agencies – To fill up this vacuum, it is directed that
henceforth, before an advertisement is printed/aired/displayed, a
Self declaration shall be submitted by the advertiser/advertising
agency on the lines contemplated in Rule 7 of the Cable Television
Networks Rules, 1994 – No advertisements to be run on the relevant
channels and/or in the print media/internet without uploading the
self-declaration – The said directions to be treated as the law
declared by the Supreme Court u/Art.141 of the Constitution.
[Paras 23 and 24]
Food, Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Direction to file
affidavit furnishing relevant data with regard to the complaints
received by FSSAI:
Held: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare directed to file an
affidavit furnishing the relevant data with regard to the complaints
received by the Food, Safety and Standard Authority of India
(FSSAI) and the action taken on such complaints relating to penalty
for selling food not of the nature or substance or quality demanded
(Section 50), penalty for sub-standard food (Section 51), penalty for
misbranded food (Section 52), penalty for misleading advertisement
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 377
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
(Section 53) and penalty for food containing extraneous matter
(Section 54) – FSSAI is authorized to take action on its own in the
event of any such misleading advertisements coming to its notice,
without waiting for any complaint to be received – Therefore, the
affidavit proposed to be filed as directed above, shall indicate the
nature of action taken by FSSAI on its own, besides on complaints
received under the FSSA, 2006 from the year 2018 onwards and
the action proposed to be taken by it to deal with misleading
advertisements. [Paras 25 and 26]
Directions by the Supreme Court – Advertisement – Misleading
advertisement – Deceptive advertisement:
Held: The Counsels for all the State Governments/Union Territories,
are directed to file independent affidavits of the Licensing authorities
in each State/UT regarding the action taken by them in respect of
misleading advertisements being published/displayed in the press/
electronic media that run contrary to the provisions of the DMR,
1954 and Rules, DC Act, 1940 and C.P. Act, 1986 – The affidavits
shall focus on the action taken for the period from the year 2018
onwards. [Para 8]
Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 – r.170 – The Union of
India was called upon to explain its letter dated 29th August,
2023 issued by the Ministry of AYUSH and addressed to all
State Governments/Union Territories and Drug Controllers of
the Ministry of AYUSH informing that the Ayurvedic Siddha
and Unani Drugs Technical Advisory Board (ASUDTAB)
had recommended in its meeting that r.170 of the Drugs
and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 be deleted from the Drugs and
Cosmetics Rules, 1945 and pending action on the said
recommendation, all authorities were directed not to initiate
any action under the said rule:
Held: The ASUDTAB had recommended that final notification be
issued for omission of r.170 – The said recommendation was placed
before the Ministry of Law and Justice for approval – The Ministry
recommended that the final notification should be published, if no
objections/suggestions are received – The said development took
place in the month of July, 2023 – However, the Ministry of AYUSH
proceeded to issue the Notification only on 02nd February, 2024,
inviting objections to the recommendations/suggestions to the draft
notification from all stakeholders – No further steps have been taken
by the Ministry – There is no clarity as to how many objections
378 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
were received on the draft notification – The Ministry of AYUSH is
directed to expedite steps proposed to be taken by it – In view of
the Court, an administrative instruction issued by virtue of the letter
dated 29th August, 2023, cannot put on hold r.170 of the Drugs
and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 so long as it remains enforceable in
law – Additional Solicitor General submitted on instructions that
the Ministry shall forthwith withdraw the letter dated 29th August,
2023 – Same was directed to be given an immediate effect. [Paras
9, 10, 11]
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Central Consumer Protection
Authority (Chapter III) – Use of:
Held: When the C.P. Act, 1986 has dedicated an entire chapter
to the Central Consumer Protection Authority (Chapter III) that
contemplates establishment of a Central Consumer Protection
Authority by the Central Government to regulate matters relating
to violation of the rights of the consumers, unfair trade practices
and false/misleading advertisements which are prejudicial to the
interest of the public and consumers and to promote, protect and
enforce the rights of the consumers as a class, the said provisions
ought to be used with much more vigour and intensity. [Para 18]
List of Acts
Drug and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act,
1954; Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940; Consumer Protection Act,
1986; Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945; TV channels under the
Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995; Food, Safety
and Standards Act, 2006; Cable Television Networks (Amendment)
Rules, 2021; Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994.
List of Keywords
Advertisement; Misleading advertisement; Deceptive advertisement;
Responsibility and duty of manufacturers, Service providers;
Advertisers; Advertising agencies; Enforcement of the fundamental
right to health; Awareness regarding quality of products; Self-
declaration by the advertiser/advertising agency; Violation of the
rights of the consumers; Unfair trade practices.
Case Arising From
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 645 of 2022
(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 379
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Appearances for Parties
P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv., Prabhas Bajaj, Priyanshu Tyagi, Amarjeet
Singh, Rishav Rai, Ms. Deveshi Chand, Dipanshu Krishan, Advs.
for the Petitioners.
K.M. Natraj, ASG., Mukul Rohatgi, Vipin Sanghi, Balbir Singh, Arvind
Nayar, C.U. Singh, Sr. Advs., Sharath Nambiar, Vinayak Sharma,
Rajat Nair, Kanu Agrawal, Shashank Bajpai, Ms. Priya Mishra, Ishaan
Sharma, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Harish Pandey, Shafik Ahmed, Ajay
Sharma, Mukesh Verma, Ms. Priyanka, Sunny, Ms. Avni Singh, Jitin
Chaturvedi, Ms. Bhawna Gera, Divyansh Shrivastava, Amrish Kumar,
Simranjeet Singh, Gautam Talukdar, Raushal Kumar, Ms. Apurbaa
Dutta, Ms. Neha Gupta, Ms. Smita Jain, Karan Jain, Rishabh Pant,
Nikhil Rohatgi, Naman Tandon, Rohit Gandhi, Akshay Joshi, Ms.
Vanshaja Shukla, Kumar Anurag Singh, Honey Khanna, Ms. Pallavi
Langar, Ms. Aparna Bhat, Ms. Karishma Maria, Ms. Bidya Mohanty,
Katyayani Suhrud, Ms. Mrinmoi Chatterjee , Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker,
Saurabh Singh, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Ms. Devyani Bhatt, Ms. Neha
Singh, Ms. Abhipsa Mohanty, Ms. Indira Bhakar, Mukesh Kumar
Verma, Kanu Agarwal, Varun Chugh, Vatsal Joshi, Rajesh Singh
Chauhan, Anil Hooda, Vineet Singh, Piyush Beriwal, Mukesh Kumar
Maroria, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Ms. Limayinla Jamir, Amit Kumar Singh,
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Prang Newmai, Advs.
for the Respondents.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
Interlocutory Application No.110011 of 2024
1. This application has been moved by the respondent No.5 praying
inter alia that judicial notice be taken of the statements made by
the President, Indian Medical Association1-Petitioner No.1 of the
offending statements made by him in his interview published in
various publications on 29th April, 2024, on the eve of this matter
being listed in this Court on 30th April, 2024.
2. It is pertinent to note that a reference was made by learned counsel
for the respondents No.5 to 7 to the aforesaid interview on the
1 For short ‘IMA’
380 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
last date of hearing as well and a copy of the interview printed in
the press was duly furnished to Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned Senior
counsel who had sought time to respond. Despite that, no response
has been filed so far.
3. Issue notice.
4. Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned Senior counsel states that his briefing
counsel accepts notice on behalf of the President, IMA. He shall be
impleaded as a co-respondent in the present proceedings. Amended
Memo of parties shall be filed by the counsel for the petitioner no.
1- IMA before the next date of hearing. Reply be filed well before
the next date of hearing, i.e., 14th May, 2024.
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.645/2022:
1. It is submitted on behalf of the respondents no. 5 to 7/proposed
contemnors that pursuant to the orders passed on the last date of
hearing, i.e. 30th April, 2024, the relevant pages of each newspaper
in original, where a public apology has been published by the
respondents no.5 to 7, tendering an unqualified apology for violating
the orders of this Court as passed on 23rd April, 2024, by continuing
to issue deceptive advertisements and for breaching the undertakings
given to this Court, has been filed. It is submitted that the Registry
has accepted one set of the said documents. The second set of
documents, that are photocopies of the originals of the already filed
newspapers, are proposed to be filed in the course of the day.
2. The photo copies shall be filed at the earliest. The Registry shall
take the same on record.
3. Service has been effected on the National Medical Commission2 that
is represented by a counsel. However, no steps have been taken by
NMC to file an affidavit in the light of the observations made by this
Court in para 9 of the order passed on 23rd April, 2024. NMC shall
file an affidavit before the next date of hearing, i.e. 14th May, 2024.
4. On the last date of hearing, keeping in mind the number of misleading
advertisements that are being published/displayed with little/nil
accountability on the part of the manufacturers, promoters and
advertisers, it was deemed appropriate to implead the Ministry of
2 For short ‘the NMC’
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 381
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Food and Public Distribution, Ministry
of Information and Broadcasting and Ministry of Electronics and
Information Technology as parties in the present proceedings to
examine the steps taken by them to prevent abuse of the Drug and
Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 3 and
the Rules, the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 19404 and the Consumer
Protection Act, 19865. In light of the stand taken by Union of India
that implementation of the DMR Act, 1954 lies in the hands of the
State Governments/UT Licensing Authorities, all of them were also
directed to be impleaded in the present proceedings.
5. Mr. K.M. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General who is already
appearing for the Ministry of Ayush and Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare, Union of India submits that besides an earlier affidavit filed by
the Ministry of AYUSH, an additional affidavit has been filed. Ministry
of Consumer Affairs and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
have also filed separate affidavits. He submits that the Department of
Food and Public Distribution (under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs)
and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology do not
have a major role to play in respect of the issue being examined by
the Court. The relevant ministries are the Ministry of AYUSH, Ministry
of Health and Family Welfare, Ministry of Consumer Affairs and the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner-IMA submits that as was permitted
by this Court, service has been effected on the Standing counsel of
all the State Governments/Union Territories. Only the following State
Governments/Union Territories have been served:
(i) Himachal Pradesh;
(ii) Jharkhand;
(iii) Kerala;
(iv) NCT of Delhi;
(v) Odisha;
(vi) Puducherry;
3 In short DMR Act, 1954
4 In short DC Act, 1940
5 In short C.P. Act, 1986
382 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
(vii) Rajasthan;
(viii) Tamil Nadu;
(ix) Telangana;
(x) Uttarakhand; and
(xi) West Bengal
Appearance has been entered by learned counsel for the NCT of
Delhi, States of Gujarat, Nagaland, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh
and U.T. of Ladakh.
7. Learned counsel for the State of Uttarakhand submits that an
affidavit has already been filed by the State Licensing Authority and
an additional affidavit is proposed to be filed.
8. Learned counsel for all the State Governments/Union Territories
besides those mentioned above, are directed to file independent
affidavits of the Licensing authorities in each State/UT regarding the
action taken by them in respect of misleading advertisements being
published/displayed in the press/electronic media that run contrary
to the provisions of the DMR, 1954 and Rules, DC Act, 1940 and
C.P. Act, 1986. The affidavits shall focus on the action taken for the
period from the year 2018 onwards.
9. Coming to the issue highlighted on the last date of hearing when
the Union of India was called upon to explain its letter dated 29th
August, 2023 issued by the Ministry of AYUSH and addressed to
all State Governments/Union Territories and Drug Controllers of the
Ministry of AYUSH informing that the Ayurvedic Siddha and Unani
Drugs Technical Advisory Board6 had recommended in its meeting
that Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 be deleted
from the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 and pending action on
the said recommendation, all authorities were directed not to initiate
any action under the said rule, Learned ASG seeks to explain that
Rule 170 has been challenged in different proceedings pending before
various High Courts including the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay and
Kerala. Pursuant to an order dated 01st May, 2023 passed by the
High Court of Delhi in a batch of petitions, lead matter being W.P.
6 In short ASUDTAB
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 383
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
(C) No.321/2019, directions were issued that any decision taken
by the Union of India pursuant to the recommendations made by
ASUDTAB shall not be implemented for a period of four weeks from
the date of its communication and the said interim arrangement shall
continue to operate.
10. It is submitted that thereafter, ASUDTAB had recommended that
final notification be issued for omission of Rule 170. The said
recommendation was placed before the Ministry of Law and Justice
for approval. The Ministry recommended that the final notification
should be published within three months, if no objections/suggestions
are received and within six months if a large number of objections/
suggestions are received on the draft notification.
11. The above development took place in the month of July, 2023. However,
the Ministry of AYUSH proceeded to issue the Notification only on
02nd February, 2024, inviting objections to the recommendations/
suggestions to the draft notification from all stakeholders within 30
days from the date of the notification being issued in the Official
Gazette. Period of 30 days has long since expired but no further
steps have been taken by the Ministry of AYUSH. Learned ASG is
not in a position to inform us as to how many objections/suggestions
were received on the draft notification. The Ministry of AYUSH is
directed to expedite steps proposed to be taken by it.
12. In our view, an administrative instruction issued by virtue of the letter
dated 29th August, 2023, cannot put on hold Rule 170 of the Drugs
and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 so long as it remains enforceable in law.
13. Mr. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General submits on instructions
that the Ministry shall forthwith withdraw the letter dated 29th August,
2023. Needful shall be done with immediate effect.
14. Coming next to the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, the same refers to a series of regulatory mechanisms
laid down for TV channels under the Cable Television Networks
(Regulation) Act, 19957. It is submitted that there are self regulatory
bodies of the broadcasters, constituted by the broadcasters or its
Association and it is for them to perform various functions including
overseeing and assurance and an adherence by the broadcasters
7 In short, CTN Act, 1995
384 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
to the Programme Code and Advertising Code, provide guidance to
broadcasters on various aspects of the aforesaid Codes, dispose of
grievances that have not been disposed of by the broadcasters within
a fixed timeline, hear appeals and issue guidance/advisories to the
broadcasters from time to time. It is further submitted that where the
broadcasters fail to comply with the guidance/advisory of the said
regulating body within the specified timeline, the self regulatory body
shall refer the matter to the Oversight Mechanism within 15 days.
15. The details regarding the Oversight Mechanism have also been set
out in the affidavit. Reference has been made to Inter Departmental
Committee to be constituted by the Central Government that
is required to devise its own procedure for hearing grievances/
complaints and for advising/warning/censuring/admonishing/
reprimanding the defaulting broadcaster or requiring an apology
from such a broadcaster, including a warning card or a disclaimer
and deletion/modification of the content. The last option is of taking
the channel or the programme in question off-air for a specified time
period. The affidavit also refers to the steps taken for implementation
of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 20218.
16. The Regulatory Mechanism in respect of the Print Media and the
overall action taken by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
since 2018 has been mentioned in the affidavit. A computation of the
action taken on complaints received against TV channels between the
year 2018 to 03rd May, 2024 shows that a total of 1645 complaints
have been received in the above duration out of which, only 53
were sent to the broadcasters, 769 were sent to the ASCI, 235 were
sent to the concerned departments/regulators and 22 were sent to
PCI. Only 566 complaints have been responded to. Learned ASG
submits that there is no data available in the Ministry on the action
if any, ultimately taken to redress the grievances received against
the TV Channels.
17. The summary of the action taken against broadcasters for violation
of the Advertisement Code since 2018 points a dismal picture.
Action has been taken against the broadcasters for violation of the
Advertisement Code in only 60 cases. Coordinated action with the
Ministry of AYUSH finds separate mention in the affidavit. It also
8 In short, Amendment Rules, 2021
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 385
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
refers to the suo moto action taken by the Ministry on grounds of
obscenity. There are only 3 instances of action taken in respect of
misleading advertisements aired on FM Radio. The Press Council of
India is stated to have received 77 complaints relating to misleading
advertisements since the year 2018. Out of those 77 cases, 39 have
been closed being defective, 15 have been closed on undertaking from
the respondents stating that they will not publish such advertisements
in the future and 17 cases are on-going.
18. We are of the opinion that when the C.P. Act, 1986 has dedicated an
entire chapter to the Central Consumer Protection Authority (Chapter
III) that contemplates establishment of a Central Consumer Protection
Authority9 by the Central Government to regulate matters relating to
violation of the rights of the consumers, unfair trade practices and
false/misleading advertisements which are prejudicial to the interest
of the public and consumers and to promote, protect and enforce
the rights of the consumers as a class, the said provisions ought to
be used with much more vigour and intensity.
19. Learned Additional Solicitor General informs the Court that Central
Government has established a Consumer Protection Authority which
is functional and its powers and functions as delineated in Section
18, are fairly broad based and all encompassing.
20. It is pertinent to note that the Ministry of Consumer Affairs has
enclosed with its affidavit, Notification dated 09th June, 2022, setting
out the Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and
Endorsements of Misleading Advertisements, 202210 that deals with
prohibition of surrogate advertising, free claims advertisements,
children targeted advertisements, and advertisements that are
prohibited by law. Guidelines, 2022 specifically define amongst others,
the expression “bait advertisements”, “endorser” and “surrogate
advertising”. A status report of the action taken by the Central Authority
on false and misleading advertisements including food and health
products finds mention at Annexure R-4 and shows that from July,
2020 to April, 2024, the total notices issued by the Central Authority
for misleading advertisements is 163. Out of the said 163 notices, 58
were closed and the remaining 105 are stated to be under process.
9 In short, Central Authority
10 In short, Guidelines, 2022
386 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Not much light has been thrown on the nature of action taken and the
activities of the Authority which is empowered to take even suo moto
action, whenever false/misleading advertisements are noticed. The
Ministry of Consumer Affairs is directed to file an additional affidavit
setting out the action taken by the Central Authority on noticing/
being informed of false/misleading advertisements, particularly in
the food and health sector.
21. We are of the firm view that advertisers/advertising agencies and
endorsers are equally responsible for issuing false and misleading
advertisements. Such endorsements that are routinely made
by public figures, influencers, celebrities etc. go a long way in
promoting a product. It is imperative for them to act with a sense of
responsibility when endorsing any product and take responsibility
for the same, as reflected in Guideline No.8 of the Guidelines, 2022
that relates to advertisements that address/target or use children
for various purposes and Guideline No.12 that lays down the duties
of manufacturers, service providers, advertisers and advertising
agencies to ensure that the trust of the consumer is not abused or
exploited due to sheer lack of knowledge or inexperience. Guideline
No.13 requires a due diligence to be undertaken for endorsement
of advertisements and requires a person who endorses a product
to have adequate information about, or experience with a specific
good, product or service that is proposed to be endorsed and ensure
that it must not be deceptive.
22. All the aforesaid provisions including statutory provisions/rules,
regulations and guidelines have a salutary object, which is to serve
the consumers and ensure that they are made aware of the kind of
product that is being offered for purchase, particularly in the food
and health sector. We are of the opinion that the aforesaid Ministries
ought to set up and promote a mechanism which encourages the
consumer to lodge a complaint and for the said complaint to be taken
to its logical conclusion, instead of simply being marked/forwarded
to the concerned State authority, thus leaving the consumer clueless
as to the final outcome of the complaint made.
23. In view of the above and in the absence of any robust mechanism
enacted in law to ensure that the obligations cast on the advertiser
to adhere to stipulations in the Guidelines, 2022 in letter and spirit,
it is deemed appropriate to invoke the powers vested in this Court
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 387
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement
of the fundamental right to health that encompasses the right of
a consumer to be made aware of the quality of products being
offered for sale by manufacturers, service providers, advertisers
and advertising agencies. To fill up this vacuum, it is directed that
henceforth, before an advertisement is printed/aired/displayed, a Self
declaration shall be submitted by the advertiser/advertising agency
on the lines contemplated in Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks
Rules, 1994 which is as follows :
“7. Advertising Code. - (1) Advertising carried in the cable
service shall be so designed as to conform to the laws of
the country and should not offend morality, decency and
religious susceptibilities of the subscribers.
(2) No advertisement shall be permitted which-
(i) derides any race, caste, colour, creed and nationality;
(ii) is against any provision of the Constitution of India;
(iii) tends to incite people to crime, cause disorder or
violence, or breach of law or glorifies violence or
obscenity in any way;
(iv) presents criminality as desirable;
(v) exploits the national emblem, or any part of the
Constitution or the person or personality of a national
leader or a State dignitary;
(vi) in its depiction of women violates the constitutional
guarantees to all citizens. In particular, no
advertisement shall be permitted which projects a
derogatory image of women. Women must not be
portrayed in a manner that emphasises passive,
submissive qualities and encourages them to play a
subordinate, secondary role in the family and society.
The cable operator shall ensure that the portrayal of
the female form, in the programmes carried in his
cable service, is tasteful and aesthetic, and is within
the well established norms of good taste and decency;
(vii) exploits social evils like dowry, child marriage.
388 [2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
(viii) promotes directly or indirectly production, sale or
consumption of-
(A) cigarettes, tobacco products, wine, alcohol, liquor or
other intoxicants;
(5) No advertisement shall contain references which
are likely to lead the public to infer that the product
advertised or any of its ingredients has some special
or miraculous or super-natural property or quality,
which is difficult of being proved.”
24. The Self-declaration shall be uploaded by the advertiser/advertising
agency on the Broadcast Sewa Portal run under the aegis of the
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. As for the advertisements
in the Press/Print Media/Internet, the Ministry is directed to create a
dedicated portal within four weeks from today. Immediately on the
portal being activated, the advertisers shall upload a Self-declaration
before any advertisement is issued in the Press/Print Media/Internet.
Proof of uploading the Self-declaration shall be made available by
the advertisers to the concerned broadcaster/printer/publisher/T.V.
Channel/electronic media, as the case may be, for the records.
No advertisements shall be permitted to be run on the relevant
channels and/or in the print media/internet without uploading the
self-declaration as directed above. The above directions shall be
treated as the law declared by this Court under Article 141 of the
Constitution of India.
25. Noticing the provisions of the Food, Safety and Standards Act, 200611,
it is deemed appropriate to direct the Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare to file an affidavit furnishing the relevant data with regard to
the complaints received by the Food, Safety and Standard Authority
of India12 and the action taken on such complaints relating to penalty
for selling food not of the nature or substance or quality demanded
(Section 50), penalty for sub-standard food (Section 51), penalty for
misbranded food (Section 52), penalty for misleading advertisement
(Section 53) and penalty for food containing extraneous matter
(Section 54).
11 In short, FSSA, 2006
12 In short, FSSAI
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 389
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
26. We may note that FSSAI is authorized to take action on its own
in the event of any such misleading advertisements coming to its
notice, without waiting for any complaint to be received. Therefore,
the affidavit proposed to be filed as directed above, shall indicate the
nature of action taken by FSSAI on its own, besides on complaints
received under the FSSA, 2006 from the year 2018 onwards
and the action proposed to be taken by it to deal with misleading
advertisements.
27. List on 09th July, 2024, at the top of the Board.
Result of the case: Directions issued.
†
Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Advertisement"Sign in to search