SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Del) 99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
MAHESH BHATT - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
WP (C) No.18761 of 2005 and WP (C) No.23716 of 2005
Decided On : 23-01-2009

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. C.M. Lall, Advocate.
Mr. P.P. Malhotra, ASG with Mr. Mukul Gupta, Mr. Shankar Chhabra and Mr. Chetan Chawla, Advocates for the UOI.

Headnote:

The Supreme Court of India was tasked with determining the constitutionality of certain rules promulgated under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (the Act). The rules in question restricted the depiction of tobacco products in films and television programs. The Court held that the rules were ultra vires the Act and violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. The Court found that the rules were not necessary to achieve the Act's objective of discouraging tobacco use and that they imposed an unreasonable restriction on creative expression.

Fact of the Case:

The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (the Act) was enacted to discourage tobacco use. The Act prohibited the advertisement of tobacco products and provided for the regulation of their trade and commerce. In 2004, the government promulgated rules under the Act (the Rules) that restricted the depiction of tobacco products in films and television programs. The Rules prohibited the display of tobacco products in such a way that they were visible to persons below the age of eighteen years. They also required that tobacco products be displayed with a warning label that occupied at least twenty percent of the display area. The Rules further prohibited the depiction of tobacco products in films and television programs that were intended for children or that were likely to be seen by children.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Rules were ultra vires the Act and violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The Court found that the Rules were not necessary to achieve the Act's objective of discouraging tobacco use and that they imposed an unreasonable restriction on creative expression.

Issues: 1. Whether the Rules were ultra vires the Act. 2. Whether the Rules violated Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Rules were ultra vires the Act because they were not necessary to achieve the Act's objective of discouraging tobacco use. The Court found that the Act already contained a number of provisions that were sufficient to achieve this objective, such as the prohibition on the advertisement of tobacco products and the requirement that tobacco products be displayed with a warning label. The Court also found that the Rules were overly broad and that they would have a chilling effect on creative expression. 2. The Court held that the Rules violated Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India because they imposed an unreasonable restriction on creative expression. The Court found that the Rules were not necessary to achieve the Act's objective of discouraging tobacco use and that they would have a significant impact on the ability of filmmakers and television producers to express themselves freely. The Court also found that the Rules were not narrowly tailored to achieve their objective and that they would have a disproportionate impact on creative expression.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petitions and struck down the Rules as unconstitutional.

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

1. To cease smoking is the easiest thing I ever did, I ought to know because I have done it a thousand times, said Mark Twain. Smoking is a habit which has permeated ages its harmful effects well-known. It is a habit most difficult to give up but the consequences are so damaging not only to the person indulging in it but to other people in and around him that it has formed a part of a larger debate worldwide leading to passing of necessary legislations to discourage it. The strength to give it up, however, often comes from within rather than without in the form of any legislations.

2. The subject itself has bred controversies in different forms. The impact of smoking by way of representation in films and media has formed the basis of two erudite judgements of my brother Judges who have, however, agreed to disagree on a crucial aspect of it without there being any disagreement on the harmful effects of it. It is this disagreement which has resulted in the present reference.

3. It must be taken note of at the inception itself that the two judgements to the extent they agree really do not call for any further comments. There is no dispute about the authority of the Parliament insofar as its legislative competence is concerned to enact The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). It is, however, the Rules framed thereunder in exercise of the powers conferred under the said Act which have given rise to this reference. The Rules have also had a chequered history from a more stringent stipulation to a more moderate one ostensibly on the basis of views expressed against the Rules made as impinging on the freedom of the media and the press. The historical perspective which gave rise to the said Act can be deciphered from the preamble itself which is reproduced hereinunder: An Act to prohibit the advertisement of, and to provide for the regulation of trade and commerce in, and production, supply and distribution of, cigarettes and other tobacco products and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. WHEREAS, the Resolution passed by the 39th World Health Assembly (WHO), in its Fourteenth Plenary meeting held on the 15th May, 1986 urged the member States of WHO which have not yet done so to implement the measures to ensure that effective protection i provided to non-smokers from involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke and to protect children and young people from being addicted to the use of tobacco; AND WHEREAS, the 43rd World Health Assembly in its Fourteenth Plenary meeting held on the 17th May, 1990, reiterated the concerns expressed in the Resolution passed in the 39th World Health Assembly and urged Member States to consider in their tobacco control strategies plans for legislation and other effective measures for protecting their citizens with special attention to risk groups such as pregnant women and children from involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke, discourage the use of tobacco and impose progressive restrictions and take concerted action to eventually eliminate all direct and indirect advertising, promotion and sponsorship concerning tobacco; AND WHEREAS, it is considered expedient to enact a comprehensive law on tobacco in the public interest and to protect the public health; AND WHEREAS, it is expedient to prohibit the consumption of cigarettes and other tobacco products which are injurious to health with a view to achieving improvement of public health in general as enjoined by article 47 of the Constitution; AND WHEREAS, it is expedient to prohibit the advertisement of, and to provide for regulation of trade and commerce, production, supply and distribution of, cigarettes and other tobacco products and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto

4. A reading of the aforesaid Preamble shows that the said Act is not only a ch





































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top