Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff have been issued show-cause notices by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over their appearance in an advertisement for Vimal Elaichi. The regulator has alleged that the campaign may amount to indirect or surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a product whose manufacture, storage, transportation, distribution and sale are prohibited in Maharashtra.
The notices were issued as the Maharashtra FDA intensifies its crackdown on gutkha, pan masala and tobacco or nicotine-containing products. The actors have been asked to explain their involvement in the advertisement and why action should not be initiated against them. They have reportedly been given 15 days to respond. The regulator’s action could have wider implications for celebrity endorsements of products associated with prohibited tobacco-related brands.
Maharashtra FDA Targets Vimal Advertisement
The FDA’s action relates to a Vimal Elaichi advertisement featuring Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff.
The advertisement was part of a 2024 campaign for Vimal Elaichi, a cardamom product marketed under the Vimal brand.
According to the Maharashtra FDA, the advertisement’s branding and presentation could create an association with Vimal Pan Masala.
| Key Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Actors issued notices | Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, Tiger Shroff |
| Product advertised | Vimal Elaichi |
| Brand association | Vimal |
| Regulator | Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration |
| Notice type | Show-cause notice |
| Notice issued | August 2026 |
| Response period | 15 days |
| Main allegation | Indirect or surrogate promotion |
| Product at issue | Vimal Pan Masala |
| Maharashtra status | Manufacture and sale prohibited |
| Law cited | Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 |
The regulator is examining whether promoting the elaichi product effectively promotes the wider Vimal pan masala brand.
Why the FDA Issued the Notices
The Maharashtra FDA said its examination of the advertisement raised concerns that the campaign promoted the Vimal brand, which is primarily associated with pan masala.
The regulator’s position is that the use of a permitted product such as elaichi could potentially function as a form of surrogate advertising if it helps maintain consumer recognition of a prohibited tobacco-related product.
The notices therefore focus not only on the specific product shown in the advertisement but also on the wider brand association.
FDA’s Surrogate Advertising Concern
Vimal Elaichi
↓
Vimal branding
↓
Brand associated with pan masala
↓
Pan masala prohibited in Maharashtra
↓
Potential indirect promotion
↓
FDA investigation
The regulator has described the alleged connection as a serious question requiring an explanation from the actors and other parties involved.
What Is Surrogate Advertising?
Surrogate advertising refers to a marketing strategy in which a brand associated with a restricted or prohibited product promotes another product under the same or similar branding.
The promoted product may be legally permissible, while the advertising can potentially reinforce recognition of the restricted product.
This technique has historically been associated with categories such as tobacco and alcohol.
How Surrogate Advertising Works
Restricted product
↓
Direct advertising prohibited
↓
Brand creates another product
↓
Same or similar branding
↓
Celebrity endorsement
↓
Consumer brand recall
↓
Indirect promotion
The Maharashtra FDA is now examining whether the Vimal Elaichi campaign falls within this category.
Vimal Pan Masala Is Prohibited in Maharashtra
The FDA’s notice states that Vimal Pan Masala is among the products prohibited in Maharashtra.
The state’s prohibition order covers the manufacture, storage, transportation, distribution and sale of the prohibited product.
The regulatory action against the advertisement follows this prohibition.
The FDA is therefore examining whether advertising another product carrying the same brand identity could undermine the purpose of the ban.
Actors Have 15 Days to Respond
The show-cause notices require Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff to explain their roles in the advertisement.
They have been given 15 days to submit their responses.
A show-cause notice is not itself a finding of guilt or a final penalty.
The regulator must consider the explanations and other relevant evidence before deciding whether further action is warranted.
Current Legal Position
FDA issues notice
↓
Actors submit explanations
↓
FDA examines responses
↓
Further regulatory decision
↓
Possible action or closure
The outcome therefore remains uncertain.
No Penalty Has Been Finally Imposed
The notices should not be interpreted as a final finding that the three actors violated the law.
The FDA has raised allegations and asked the actors to explain why action should not be taken.
Any eventual penalty or other regulatory measure would depend on the proceedings that follow.
This distinction is important because the current development is at the show-cause stage.
The Advertisement Was Released in 2024
The actors appeared together in a Vimal Elaichi campaign released in 2024.
The advertisement featured the three Bollywood stars promoting the cardamom product under the Vimal brand.
The FDA’s current action comes roughly two years after the campaign appeared.
The regulator has now examined the campaign in the context of its wider enforcement drive against prohibited tobacco and pan masala products.
Maharashtra FDA Is Intensifying Enforcement
The notices form part of a broader enforcement campaign by the Maharashtra FDA.
The regulator has increased inspections and action against prohibited food products, including gutkha and pan masala containing tobacco or nicotine.
The agency has also been examining supply networks involved in the distribution of banned products.
Wider Enforcement Drive
FDA inspections
↓
Banned product identification
↓
Supply-chain investigation
↓
Manufacturers
+
Distributors
+
Retailers
↓
Legal action
+
Celebrity advertising scrutiny
The action against the actors therefore represents one component of a broader crackdown.
Celebrity Endorsements Are Under Greater Scrutiny
The case also highlights the increasing scrutiny faced by celebrities who endorse products associated with restricted categories.
Bollywood stars have significant influence over consumer behaviour and brand recognition.
Regulators are increasingly examining whether celebrities may indirectly promote products that cannot legally be advertised directly.
Why Brand Association Matters
The FDA’s argument is based partly on the strength of the Vimal brand’s association with pan masala.
Even if an advertisement specifically displays elaichi, the regulator believes the broader branding may remind consumers of the pan masala product.
Brand Recall Model
Celebrity
↓
Vimal Elaichi advertisement
↓
Vimal brand visibility
↓
Consumer recognition
↓
Association with Vimal Pan Masala
↓
Potential surrogate promotion
The question before the regulator is whether this association is sufficient to constitute an indirect advertisement.
Shah Rukh Khan Has Previously Faced Similar Scrutiny
Shah Rukh Khan has previously faced criticism and legal scrutiny over his involvement in pan masala advertising.
The latest Maharashtra FDA action brings the issue back into focus.
Ajay Devgn has also been associated with Vimal advertising for several years, while Tiger Shroff joined the campaign featuring the three actors.
The latest notices could renew the debate over the responsibilities of celebrity endorsers.
Ajay Devgn Has Long Been Associated With Vimal
Ajay Devgn has appeared in Vimal advertisements for years.
His association with the brand has made him one of the most recognizable celebrity faces connected to its advertising campaigns.
The FDA’s latest notice puts that long-running association under regulatory scrutiny in Maharashtra.
Tiger Shroff Also Featured in the Campaign
Tiger Shroff appeared alongside Shah Rukh Khan and Ajay Devgn in the 2024 Vimal Elaichi campaign.
The FDA has asked him to explain his role in the advertisement.
The notice was reportedly served through his production company.
Social Media Promotions Could Also Be Affected
The FDA’s action is not necessarily limited to television advertising.
The regulator has been examining promotional material distributed across television, digital platforms and social media.
The actors may therefore need to review existing promotional posts associated with the campaign.
Advertising Channels Under Scrutiny
Television
+
Digital platforms
+
Social media
+
Other promotional channels
↓
FDA examination
The development could encourage celebrities and brands to reassess advertising campaigns across multiple platforms.
Food Safety Law Is Central to the Case
The FDA is relying on provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
The law contains provisions relating to misleading advertisements and restrictions on certain food products.
The regulator is examining whether the campaign violates these provisions by indirectly promoting a prohibited product.
What Happens After the Notices?
The actors will have to submit their explanations within the prescribed period.
The FDA will then assess the responses and available evidence.
Possible outcomes could include further proceedings, penalties or other directions if violations are established.
Alternatively, the matter could be closed if the regulator is not satisfied that the legal requirements for action have been met.
Next Steps
Show-cause notices
↓
15-day response period
↓
Actors submit explanations
↓
FDA reviews evidence
↓
Decision on further action
The next regulatory decision will determine the consequences for the actors and other parties involved.
The Case Could Affect Advertising Practices
If the FDA ultimately establishes that the campaign constituted surrogate advertising, the case could have broader implications for celebrity advertising.
Brands associated with restricted products may face greater scrutiny when promoting alternative products under the same brand name.
Potential Advertising Impact
Stronger regulatory scrutiny
↓
Brand extensions reviewed
↓
Celebrity endorsements examined
↓
Greater compliance checks
↓
Changes to advertising strategies
This could make companies more cautious about using celebrity-led campaigns for brand extensions.
Tobacco Advertising Rules Are Already Strict
India has strict restrictions on direct advertising of tobacco products.
Companies have therefore increasingly used alternative product categories and brand extensions to maintain brand visibility.
Regulators are now focusing on whether such campaigns effectively bypass restrictions.
The Role of Brand Extensions
Brand extensions can be legitimate businesses.
A company can sell products such as elaichi or mouth fresheners under a recognized brand name.
However, the regulatory question arises when the extension is closely associated with a prohibited product and the advertising potentially reinforces the prohibited brand.
The Vimal case puts this distinction under examination.
Celebrity Endorsement Creates Additional Reach
A celebrity campaign can significantly increase brand visibility.
The presence of three major Bollywood actors in one advertisement can make the campaign particularly memorable.
The FDA’s action therefore raises questions about whether celebrities should conduct additional due diligence before endorsing brands connected with restricted products.
Advertising Agencies May Face Greater Pressure
The case could also affect advertising agencies that develop campaigns for brands associated with regulated categories.
Agencies may need to conduct more detailed compliance checks before approving scripts, branding, visual elements and celebrity appearances.
Future Advertising Workflow
Brand proposal
↓
Legal review
↓
Regulatory review
↓
Celebrity due diligence
↓
Advertising campaign
↓
Monitoring
This could become more common for campaigns involving regulated products.
Brands Could Face Higher Compliance Costs
Additional legal and regulatory reviews could increase the cost and time required to launch advertising campaigns.
However, companies may consider these costs necessary to reduce the risk of penalties and reputational damage.
The Issue Goes Beyond Vimal
The regulatory scrutiny could extend to other industries that use brand extensions to market products associated with restricted categories.
Tobacco, alcohol and certain other regulated sectors have historically faced similar questions about indirect advertising.
A strong regulatory precedent could therefore affect a wider range of brands.
What It Means for Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff
For the three actors, the immediate requirement is to respond to the show-cause notices.
The notices do not constitute a final determination of liability.
Their responses will be important in determining whether the FDA takes additional action.
What It Means for Vimal
The regulatory action could increase scrutiny of the Vimal brand’s advertising strategy.
The company may need to demonstrate that its elaichi campaign promotes only the lawful product and does not indirectly advertise the prohibited pan masala product.
What It Means for Advertisers
Advertisers may need to pay greater attention to brand associations.
Simply changing the product name in an advertisement may not necessarily prevent scrutiny if the overall branding, messaging and market context continue to associate the campaign with a prohibited product.
What It Means for Consumers
The FDA’s action is ultimately part of a wider effort to restrict the promotion of products considered harmful to public health.
If enforcement becomes stronger, consumers could see fewer advertisements that indirectly maintain visibility for tobacco and pan masala brands.
What Investors and the Industry Should Watch
Industry participants should monitor:
- The actors’ responses to the FDA notices
- Any action against the Vimal brand
- Maharashtra FDA’s next decision
- Further enforcement against surrogate advertising
- Advertising rules for brand extensions
- Celebrity endorsement guidelines
- Social-media promotional content
- Enforcement against tobacco and pan masala networks
The outcome could provide an indication of how aggressively Maharashtra intends to pursue surrogate advertising.
Key Facts at a Glance
| Metric | Detail |
|---|---|
| Actors | Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, Tiger Shroff |
| Advertisement | Vimal Elaichi |
| Campaign | 2024 |
| Regulator | Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration |
| Notice type | Show-cause notice |
| Main allegation | Indirect/surrogate promotion |
| Product associated with controversy | Vimal Pan Masala |
| Maharashtra status | Prohibited |
| Response deadline | 15 days |
| Law involved | Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 |
| Final penalty | Not yet imposed |
Infographic: Why the Actors Received FDA Notices
VIMAL ELAICHI AD
↓
SHAH RUKH KHAN
+
AJAY DEVGN
+
TIGER SHROFF
↓
VIMAL BRAND PROMOTION
↓
FDA SAYS BRAND IS
PRIMARILY ASSOCIATED
WITH PAN MASALA
↓
PAN MASALA PROHIBITED
IN MAHARASHTRA
↓
FDA ALLEGES
SURROGATE PROMOTION
↓
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICES
↓
15 DAYS TO RESPOND
↓
FDA REVIEWS EXPLANATIONS
↓
POSSIBLE FURTHER ACTION
The Bigger Picture
The Maharashtra FDA’s notices to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff mark a significant escalation in scrutiny of celebrity endorsements linked to tobacco and pan masala brands. The regulator alleges that the Vimal Elaichi advertisement could indirectly promote Vimal Pan Masala, which is prohibited in Maharashtra. The central issue is whether the use of the same brand identity for a permissible product can effectively maintain consumer awareness of a prohibited product. :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}
The case also highlights a broader challenge for India’s advertising industry. Brand extensions such as elaichi and other permitted products have long provided companies associated with restricted categories with a way to maintain brand visibility. If regulators increasingly treat these campaigns as surrogate advertising, brands, advertising agencies and celebrity endorsers could face greater compliance requirements. For the three actors, however, the current notices are only show-cause proceedings, and no final penalty has been imposed at this stage. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}
Looking Ahead
The immediate next step is for Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff to respond to the Maharashtra FDA within 15 days. The regulator will then determine whether their explanations address the concerns raised in the notices. The actors’ responses, along with the agency’s subsequent decision, will establish whether the matter results in further legal or regulatory action.
Over the longer term, the case could influence how companies market products that share branding with restricted goods. A stronger crackdown on surrogate advertising could force tobacco and pan masala brands to separate their marketing identities more clearly from permissible product extensions. It could also encourage celebrities and advertising agencies to conduct more extensive legal checks before participating in campaigns connected to regulated industries.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
