Home > Recent Judgements > Madras High Court Calls For Nationwide Ban On Filter Tobacco Products To Protect Minors
Nov 06, 2024
BACKGROUND
In Aunestraja vs State, the Madras High Court has called for an urgent involvement of the Centre in banning filter tobacco products persistently on brands such as the ‘Cool Lip’ which has increased popularity among school-aged minors. This decision was motivated by the bail hearing of a man possessing filter tobacco products, where the court while granting the bail highlighted the rise in such cases specifically upon the minors and accessibility of such products in Tamil Nadu. The court observed a proactive stance on the health risks of such products and urged the centre to ban such products under section 86 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
Section 86 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006: This gives the Central Government the power to issue directions to State Governments as it may deem necessary. The Central Government can issue directions to carry out any or all provisions of the act.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether or not the state requires a nationwide ban on the product?
- Whether or not the current provisions of Tamil Nadu are sufficient to withhold the smuggling of such products?
- Whether or not Section 86 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, authorises a nationwide ban?
- Whether or not manufacturers and distributors liable for the consumer’s health?
JUDGEMENT
On the first issue, the court mindfully considered the prospect of a nationwide ban on these filter tobacco products. Justice Chakravarthy observed that certain states such as Tamil Nadu already prohibit such products and a nationwide ban creates less access to these products across all states.
Secondly, the court also focused on the current efficiency of the Tamil Nadu enforcement for the ban of these products. Even though filter tobacco is banned, there is easy availability of these products because of cross-border smuggling which calls for a national effort.
For the third issue, the court urges the centre to use the authorization under section 86 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 to issue a nationwide ban. Furthermore, the court states that the section empowers the Union Government to take actions protecting public health and safety. The court suggested that the union could render regulations preventing the sale and distribution of filter tobacco products.
Lastly, the judgement also raised questions on the accountability of such manufacturers and distributors who have the liberty to use attractive packaging for these products that end up luring minors. The court believes that such manufacturers should also be held liable to measure the availability of such products among youth.
OBSERVATION
The court directed the state of Tamil Nadu to establish “Child Tobacco Cessation Centres” across all districts as the exposition of product exists and requires specialised treatment for the counselling and treatment of minors who have been proactively exposed. Meanwhile the major ascend of this case comes from the granting of a bail application; the resolution was much larger. The broader precedent concerned a calling on both the state and central governments to take integrated action against the availability of filtered tobacco products to minors. Upon suggestion of a nationwide ban and recommendation to ‘Child Tobacco Cessation Centres’ for minors, the court was rather concerned for public health.
For more information or queries, please email us at
[email protected]
