A) ABSTRACT / HEADNOTE
The Supreme Court, in Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., addressed the issue of misleading and deceptive advertisements that affect consumer rights, especially in the health and food sectors. The judgment scrutinized the role of manufacturers, advertisers, endorsers, and service providers in promoting products that violate consumer trust through misleading practices. The Court emphasized that public figures and influencers endorsing products must undertake due diligence under Guideline No. 13 of the Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements of Misleading Advertisements, 2022. The Court directed the implementation of a self-declaration mechanism for advertisements, invoking its powers under Article 32 of the Constitution to protect the fundamental right to health. The judgment highlighted the inaction of regulatory authorities, directing them to expedite their measures and submit affidavits detailing complaints and actions taken since 2018. These measures are treated as law declared under Article 141 of the Constitution.
Keywords
- Misleading Advertisement
- Consumer Protection
- Fundamental Right to Health
- Endorsement Guidelines
- Advertising Regulations
B) CASE DETAILS
i) Judgment Cause Title
Indian Medical Association & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
ii) Case Number
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 645 of 2022
iii) Judgment Date
07 May 2024
iv) Court
Supreme Court of India
v) Quorum
Hima Kohli, J., and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.
vi) Author
Justice Hima Kohli
vii) Citation
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 375; 2024 INSC 406
viii) Legal Provisions Involved
- Article 32 of the Constitution of India
- Consumer Protection Act, 1986
- Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
- Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945
- Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994
- Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements, 2022
ix) Judgments Overruled by the Case
None specified.
x) Case is Related to which Law Subjects
- Consumer Protection Law
- Constitutional Law
- Health and Safety Regulations
- Advertising Law
C) INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF JUDGMENT
The case arises from concerns about the rising number of misleading advertisements, particularly those involving health and food products, which exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge. Despite existing frameworks like the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and the Guidelines, 2022, the Court found these measures inadequate. Public complaints about deceptive endorsements by celebrities and corporations catalyzed the Indian Medical Association to file a petition seeking judicial intervention.
The Court highlighted systemic gaps, such as the lack of a robust grievance redressal mechanism, insufficient action by regulatory bodies like FSSAI, and procedural delays in notifying critical amendments. In response, the Court set out guidelines for accountability, expanding the scope of consumer rights and regulatory obligations under Article 32.
D) FACTS OF THE CASE
- The petition, filed by the Indian Medical Association, raised the issue of misleading advertisements and their impact on consumer health and safety.
- Advertisements frequently promoted products with false claims, violating the trust of consumers and breaching statutory provisions like the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
- Endorsers, including celebrities and influencers, often lacked adequate knowledge or experience with the endorsed products, contravening Guideline No. 13 of the 2022 Guidelines.
- Regulatory bodies such as FSSAI and the Ministry of AYUSH failed to take effective actions on complaints since 2018.
- The Court intervened to ensure compliance with laws and to establish a self-declaration mechanism for advertisers.
E) LEGAL ISSUES RAISED
- Whether misleading advertisements violate consumers’ fundamental right to health under Article 21.
- What are the liabilities of manufacturers, advertisers, and endorsers in ensuring truthful and non-deceptive promotions?
- Does the existing legal framework provide adequate safeguards against misleading advertisements?
- What is the role of regulatory authorities in addressing complaints and ensuring compliance with the Guidelines, 2022?
F) PETITIONER/APPELLANT’S ARGUMENTS
- Counsels for the Indian Medical Association argued that misleading advertisements harm consumer interests, particularly in the health and food sectors.
- The petitioners highlighted the role of celebrities and influencers in promoting harmful or substandard products without due diligence.
- They criticized the regulatory bodies’ lack of proactive measures, including FSSAI’s failure to act suo motu on violations.
- The petition emphasized the need for a transparent grievance redressal system to empower consumers and ensure accountability.
G) RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS
- Union of India and affiliated Ministries argued that existing frameworks under laws like the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, are sufficient.
- The Ministry of AYUSH pointed to ongoing steps to amend Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, to address misleading claims.
- The Additional Solicitor General stated that self-regulatory mechanisms for broadcasters and advertisers are in place.
- Respondents acknowledged delays but assured the Court of enhanced measures, including updated affidavits and reports on consumer complaints.
H) JUDGMENT
a) Ratio Decidendi
- Misleading advertisements directly affect the fundamental right to health, which includes informed consumer choices.
- Endorsers, advertisers, and manufacturers are equally responsible for ensuring truthful promotions under Guidelines, 2022.
b) Obiter Dicta
- Public figures must ensure due diligence and authenticity before endorsing any product.
- Regulatory authorities need to act decisively and transparently in redressing consumer grievances.
c) Guidelines Issued
- Mandatory Self-Declarations: Advertisers must upload self-declarations on the Ministry’s portal before airing advertisements.
- Strengthening Regulatory Oversight: Ministries must file affidavits detailing actions taken against misleading advertisements since 2018.
- Transparency in Grievance Redressal: FSSAI and other bodies must publish reports on complaints and actions taken.
- Strict Accountability: Violations of the Advertisement Code will attract penalties under relevant statutes.
I) CONCLUSION & COMMENTS
The judgment strengthens consumer protection by mandating accountability for misleading advertisements. It integrates statutory duties with constitutional guarantees, ensuring transparent redressal mechanisms and proactive regulatory measures. The Court’s intervention sets a precedent for rigorous enforcement of consumer rights.
J) REFERENCES
a) Important Cases Referred
- Consumer Protection Authority v. Colgate Palmolive India Ltd.
- FSSAI v. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd.
- Re: Regulation of Advertisements on TV Channels (2015)
b) Important Statutes Referred
- Consumer Protection Act, 1986
- Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940
- Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements, 2022
- Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994
