Ajay Devgn Challenges Maharashtra FDA Notice Over Vimal Elaichi Ads in Bombay High Court

Bollywood actor Ajay Devgn has approached the Bombay High Court challenging a show-cause notice issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over his appearance in Vimal Elaichi advertisements. The regulator alleges that the campaign indirectly promotes Vimal Pan Masala, a product prohibited in Maharashtra. Devgn has argued that the notice was arbitrarily directed at him as an actor rather than the company manufacturing the product.

The case is expected to be heard on November 4, 2026, by a division bench led by Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna. Similar notices were issued to Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff, who also appeared in the advertisements. The dispute raises broader questions about the legal responsibility of celebrities who endorse products that regulators believe may indirectly advertise prohibited goods.

Key Takeaways

• Ajay Devgn has challenged a Maharashtra FDA show-cause notice in the Bombay High Court.
• The notice concerns his appearance in advertisements for Vimal Elaichi.
• The FDA alleges that the advertisements indirectly promote Vimal Pan Masala, which is prohibited in Maharashtra.
• Devgn argues that the notice was wrongly issued to him instead of the manufacturing company.
• The actor has also questioned the constitutional validity of the relevant regulatory provisions.
• Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff received similar notices.
• The Bombay High Court is likely to hear Devgn’s petition on November 4, 2026.
• The FDA says its investigation into the actors has been completed and that proceedings will continue.

Why Has Ajay Devgn Approached the Bombay High Court?

The Maharashtra FDA issued a show-cause notice to Devgn over his participation in advertisements for Vimal Elaichi.

The regulator believes that the advertisements may amount to surrogate advertising for Vimal Pan Masala, a chewable product prohibited in Maharashtra.

Surrogate advertising refers to promotional activity in which a brand advertises a permitted product or service while potentially using that promotion to indirectly market another restricted or prohibited product carrying the same or a closely associated brand identity.

In his petition, Devgn has challenged the action taken against him personally.

His principal argument is that the FDA arbitrarily targeted him as an actor rather than proceeding against the company responsible for manufacturing and marketing the product.

He has also questioned the constitutional validity of the provisions under which the notice was issued.

The High Court will now have to examine the legal questions raised in his petition. The FDA’s allegations have not yet been judicially established.

What Is the Maharashtra FDA Alleging?

The Maharashtra FDA maintains that the Vimal Elaichi advertising campaign promotes a brand strongly associated with pan masala.

Although the advertised product is cardamom, the regulator argues that the campaign’s presentation, dialogue, branding and market context raise concerns about indirect promotion of Vimal Pan Masala.

Maharashtra prohibits the manufacture, storage, transportation, distribution and sale of gutkha and pan masala containing tobacco or nicotine under its food-safety regulations.

The state renewed the relevant prohibition in July 2026.

The FDA issued notices to the actors on August 11, 2026, asking them to explain their participation in the advertisements and provide information about their endorsement arrangements.

The regulator also sought:

• Details of endorsement agreements.
• Campaign briefs and promotional arrangements.
• Information about checks undertaken before accepting the endorsement.
• Removal or discontinuation of promotional content on their digital platforms.
• An explanation of why action should not be initiated under applicable food-safety provisions.

The FDA’s position is that celebrities participating in misleading food advertisements may also face regulatory consequences.

Why Were Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff Also Issued Notices?

Ajay Devgn was not the only actor involved in the regulatory dispute.

The Maharashtra FDA also issued show-cause notices to Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff, who appeared in Vimal Elaichi advertising campaigns.

The regulator’s concerns were similar: it believed the campaign could indirectly promote a pan masala product prohibited in Maharashtra.

All three actors were asked to respond to the notices.

According to FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe, the department completed its investigation and found violations by the actors. The matter was expected to move to the adjudication stage.

Devgn’s decision to approach the Bombay High Court does not automatically stop the FDA’s separate proceedings, according to the commissioner’s statements.

The court has not yet ruled on whether the actors can be held liable under the provisions cited by the regulator.

What Laws Has the Maharashtra FDA Invoked?

The FDA’s notices refer to provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018.

Two important provisions are relevant to the dispute.

Legal provision	What it covers	Relevance to the case
Section 24 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006	Restrictions on misleading advertisements and claims concerning food	The FDA alleges that the advertising campaign could mislead consumers
Section 53 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006	Penalty for misleading advertisements	Provides for a penalty of up to ₹10 lakh for a person who is a party to a misleading food advertisement

The regulator’s position is that endorsers may be examined if their participation contributes to the publication or promotion of a misleading advertisement.

However, whether these provisions can be applied to Devgn in the circumstances of this case is a matter for the court and the relevant adjudicating authority.

What Happened in the Earlier Delhi High Court Case?

The Vimal Elaichi controversy had already reached the courts before Devgn filed his petition.

PB Agro LLP, the master licensee associated with the Vimal Elaichi and pan masala products, approached the Delhi High Court challenging the Maharashtra FDA’s notices.

The company argued that its advertisements promoted cardamom and not prohibited pan masala.

It also questioned why the FDA had issued notices to the actors when the company itself was responsible for the product.

However, the Delhi High Court dismissed the company’s plea in September 2026 on the ground that Delhi was not the appropriate territorial jurisdiction.

The dispute arose from action taken by the Maharashtra FDA over alleged activities in Maharashtra. The court indicated that the appropriate legal forum was in Maharashtra.

The dismissal did not amount to a final ruling that the advertisements were surrogate advertising. It was a decision on jurisdiction.

Devgn has now approached the Bombay High Court, where the dispute is more directly connected to the regulator’s actions.

Could the Case Affect Celebrity Endorsements in India?

The case could have implications for celebrities who endorse products sharing a brand identity with restricted or prohibited goods.

Companies sometimes advertise products such as cardamom, mouth fresheners or other permitted items under brand names also associated with pan masala or tobacco-related products.

Regulators may examine whether such campaigns genuinely promote the permitted product or indirectly advertise a restricted category.

For celebrities, the dispute raises questions about the extent of due diligence expected before accepting an endorsement.

Potential implications include:

• Greater scrutiny of brand endorsement agreements.
• More detailed checks of the products and companies behind advertising campaigns.
• Increased legal review before celebrities participate in advertisements.
• Greater attention to how permitted products are marketed under shared brand identities.
• Potential regulatory exposure for people involved in misleading food advertisements.

The final legal position will depend on the court’s interpretation of the applicable provisions and the facts of the case.

The Bigger Picture

The dispute highlights the growing scrutiny of surrogate advertising in India’s consumer and food markets. Regulators are increasingly examining whether advertisements for permitted products indirectly promote products that cannot legally be advertised or sold in a particular jurisdiction.

For the advertising industry, the case raises questions about the responsibility of celebrities, manufacturers, advertising agencies and brand owners. A ruling on the legal issues could help clarify how far food-safety regulations extend to celebrity endorsements, although the outcome will depend on the specific facts and provisions considered by the court.

Looking Ahead

The Bombay High Court is likely to take up Ajay Devgn’s petition on November 4, 2026. The hearing will be important in determining how the court approaches his challenge to the FDA notice and his arguments regarding the constitutional validity of the relevant provisions. The FDA has indicated that its separate adjudication process will continue.

The case will also be watched by Shah Rukh Khan, Tiger Shroff, advertising agencies and companies using shared brand identities across different product categories. Until the court or the adjudicating authority reaches a decision, the FDA’s allegations should be treated as allegations rather than a final finding of legal liability against the actors.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why has Ajay Devgn challenged the Maharashtra FDA notice?

Devgn has challenged a show-cause notice concerning his appearance in Vimal Elaichi advertisements. He argues that the notice was arbitrarily issued to him as an actor rather than to the manufacturing company.

2. What is the Vimal Elaichi advertising controversy?

The Maharashtra FDA alleges that advertisements for Vimal Elaichi indirectly promote Vimal Pan Masala, a product prohibited in Maharashtra. The actors and manufacturer have disputed the allegations.

3. When will the Bombay High Court hear Ajay Devgn’s petition?

The petition is likely to be heard on November 4, 2026, by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna.

4. Which other actors received similar FDA notices?

Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff also received show-cause notices over their appearances in Vimal Elaichi advertisements.

5. What penalty can apply under Section 53 of the Food Safety and Standards Act?

Section 53 provides for a penalty of up to ₹10 lakh for a person who is a party to the publication of a misleading food advertisement.

6. What is surrogate advertising?

Surrogate advertising involves promoting a permitted product or service in a way that may indirectly advertise another restricted or prohibited product associated with the same brand.

7. Did the Delhi High Court rule that the Vimal Elaichi advertisements were illegal?

No. The Delhi High Court dismissed the manufacturer’s petition on territorial-jurisdiction grounds. It did not issue a final ruling establishing that the advertisements constituted surrogate advertising.

8. Does Ajay Devgn’s court petition stop the FDA proceedings?

Not automatically. FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe has said that the department’s proceedings would continue before the relevant adjudicating authority while Devgn pursues his court challenge.