Unicaus NEWS
The petitioner lawyer Rajasimhan had filed a public curiosity litigation (PIL) earlier than the court docket on September 18, looking for a keep on the sale of the e book whose cowl picture reveals her smoking a ‘bidi’. He had alleged that it didn’t have any statutory health-hazard warning label and that this was a violation of Section 5 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2013.
During the listening to, a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji instructed the petitioner that he didn’t even present a replica of the e book to the court docket, to which he mentioned that he had taken a photograph of the e book’s cowl at a e book stall and that he didn’t see the disclaimer in the back of the e book. The court docket requested him whether or not he needed to argue on deserves or nonetheless needed to method the authority involved as specified within the Act, to establish whether or not this amounted to an infringement of the laws.
The petitioner mentioned that his grievance was in regards to the picture didn’t have a disclaimer on the entrance cowl and that he was not frightened in regards to the e book’s contents.
In an affidavit, the e book’s writer Penguin Random House India produced a photograph of the again of the e book which had talked about the disclaimer ‘Any depiction of smoking on this e book is for representational functions solely…’, which additional talked about that the publishing agency didn’t promote or endorse tobacco use. The agency additionally sought imposing of exemplary prices on the petitioner.
The case has been posted for listening to on October 7.
Published – September 25, 2025 09:45 pm IST
