Full Breakdown
Delhi High Court Dismisses Vimal Elaichi Challenge Over Maharashtra Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) Notices
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Petition Dismissed for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction
On September 14, 2026, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court rejected a writ petition filed by PB Agro LLP, the manufacturer of the mouth-freshener “Vimal Elaichi.” PB Agro had sought to quash show-cause notices issued on August 11, 2026 by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff. The court held that the dispute arose in Maharashtra and that the Delhi High Court lacked the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the matter, directing the petitioner to approach the courts in Maharashtra.
Background & Context
The Maharashtra FDA alleged that the Vimal Elaichi advertisements constituted “indirect or surrogate” promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a chewable product prohibited in the state under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Vimal Pan Masala has not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001, and pan masala containing tobacco has been barred nationwide by a Supreme Court ruling in 2013. The regulator’s notice required the three actors to submit endorsement agreements, campaign briefs and other documents to demonstrate that Vimal Elaichi is a distinct product, and it instructed the removal of related promotional material from digital platforms.
Timeline
- August 11, 2026 – Maharashtra FDA issues show-cause notice to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff.
- September 7, 2026 – Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma reserves an order focusing on jurisdiction.
- September 14, 2026 – Delhi High Court dismisses PB Agro’s petition, citing lack of territorial jurisdiction and the doctrine of forum conveniens.
Official Statements & Responses
She further contended that the Maharashtra FDA’s notice was issued by its Mumbai-based assistant commissioner to brand ambassadors who reside in Mumbai, making Maharashtra the appropriate forum.
He emphasized that the company’s endorsement agreements required compliance with all applicable laws.
Representatives of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) echoed the Centre’s position, stating that the CCPA’s own investigation into similar allegations did not confer jurisdiction on the Delhi High Court because no CCPA order was challenged in the petition.
Data & Statistics
- Notice date: August 11, 2026 (issued under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006).
- Response period: The FDA asked the actors to provide the requested documents within 15 days.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The impugned show-cause notice was issued by the FDA, Mumbai, state of Maharashtra – to the brand ambassadors engaged by the petitioner, who are residents of Mumbai – in relation to alleged activities and alleged statutory violations in Maharashtra.” — Delhi High Court. It
What’s Next
The Delhi High Court’s order leaves PB Agro free to pursue its challenge in the courts of Maharashtra, where the FDA’s notice originated. No further hearing dates have been scheduled in Delhi.