Recent Updates
-
Supreme Court Collegium summons Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav over remarks on Muslims. The judge made a series of other controversial remarks during a speech, including the use of the term "kathmullah," a derogatory slur against Muslims.
-
Atul Subhash suicide: Bengaluru Court sends estranged wife, family to judicial custody. Subhash had died by suicide in Bengaluru. He left behind an elaborate suicide note and also made a video blaming his estranged wife Nikita Singhania and her family of harassing him.
-
Tirupati Laddu controversy: Supreme Court orders probe by SIT under CBI supervision
The Court directed that the SIT shall have two officers from the CBI, two from the Andhra Pradesh State Police and one senior office of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). -
Supreme Court lawyers protest restriction of canteen menu during Navratri festival
Navratra menu does not have meat items and food prepared using or containing onion, garlic, pulses and grains. -
Will arbitration deadline change if arbitrator is substituted midway? Gujarat High Court asks. Kapil Sibal argued that if arbitration deadline starts afresh each time an arbitrator resigns, the effect would be disastrous since an arbitrator may be forced by parties to resign for the process to start afresh.[Kamal Sewaram Jadhwani v. Manbhupinder Singh Atwal and Ors].
Today’s
Awareness Series 6
Yesterday’s
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. 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. [Indian Medical Assn. v. Union of India, (2024) 8 SCC 46] CASE COMMENT : 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. Slew of measures directed by Supreme Court to protect consumers from misleading advertisements. Directions included equal responsibility of advertisers and endorsers qua misleading ads and uploading of a self-declaration form by advertisers before issuing any advertisements Subscribe to our updates now and be the first to know about the latest news and developments. Subscribe here: https://relegal.in/subscribe/