Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur appeared for the petitioner company and argued that the FDA's notice dated August 11, 2026, was sent only to the actors and not to the company itself, despite the petitioner being the one to suffer irreparable harm.
The company argued that the Maharashtra FDA lacked jurisdiction to issue directions to halt the advertisement.
In its petition, the company also stated that surrogate advertisement allegations were baseless since Vimal pan masala has not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001, and pan masala containing tobacco has been barred by the Supreme Court nationwide since 2013.
The Court was also told that the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) was already investigating similar allegations and had issued no direction against the campaign.
Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur appeared for the petitioner company and argued that the FDA's notice dated August 11, 2026, was sent only to the actors and not to the company itself, despite the petitioner being the one to suffer irreparable harm.
The company argued that the Maharashtra FDA lacked jurisdiction to issue directions to halt the advertisement.
In its petition, the company also stated that surrogate advertisement allegations were baseless since Vimal pan masala has not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001, and pan masala containing tobacco has been barred by the Supreme Court nationwide since 2013.
The Court was also told that the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) was already investigating similar allegations and had issued no direction against the campaign.
