Advertisement
Mumbai: A case involving advertisements for pan masala companies by actors Akshay Kumar, Shah Rukh Khan and Ajay Devgan has come up in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court, throwing light on the legal and ethical nuances of celebrity endorsements. The central government’s response to the contempt petition, its subsequent scheduling of hearing on May 9, 2024, and parallel proceedings in the Supreme Court, all add to the complexity of the case.
The case stems from a representation given to the Central government, seeking action against actors who support gutka companies despite being high-profile award recipients. The petitioner claimed that despite the representation given on October 22, 2022, the government did not take any action.
Due to this, the High Court issued a notice to the Cabinet Secretary of the Central Government on the contempt petition. The Deputy Solicitor General then informed the court about the show cause notices issued to the actors.
Despite the central government suggesting the petition be dismissed due to similar issues being heard in the Supreme Court, the bench decided to proceed with the case at the high court level. This decision prompts further deliberations on the matter. The ethical and legal implications of high-profile celebrities endorsing products such as gutka that are potentially harmful to public health are significant.
The petitioner particularly highlighted the involvement of ‘Padma awardees’ in such support, highlighting the contradiction of honoring individuals involved in potentially harmful activities.
The case also focuses on the role of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) in serving notice to actors for supporting tobacco companies. It emphasizes a comprehensive regulatory framework that scrutinizes and regulates celebrity endorsements to protect consumers.
The next hearing, scheduled for May 9, 2024, suggests that the case will continue for a longer period of time, allowing for a thorough examination of the legal and ethical dimensions involved. This case highlights the need for a nuanced approach to celebrity endorsements and their impact on public welfare. As proceedings proceed, this is likely to lead to further discussion of the broader implications of such supports and their alignment with public health and ethical considerations.
