Ajay Devgn Takes Vimal Elaichi Ad Notice to Bombay High Court as FDA Presses On

The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it will press ahead with adjudication proceedings over the Vimal Elaichi advertising campaign featuring Ajay Devgn, Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff, even though Devgn has asked the Bombay High Court to quash the show-cause notice served on him. The court is likely to take up the actor's petition on Wednesday, Nov. 4.

Speaking to the news agency ANI on Sunday, Nov. 1, FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe said, "Even if the concerned person has moved the High Court, we have already started adjudicating proceedings and will proceed in accordance with the law," according to Moneycontrol.

The statement followed a press conference on Friday, Oct. 30, at which Mundhe said the department's investigation into the three actors had concluded. "Three actors sought time to respond. The assistant commissioner has completed the investigation and found that they violated the state's rules in the Vimal Pan Masala advertising case. The proceedings have now concluded, and the case will be proposed for adjudication before the joint commissioner, who is the competent authority, by next week," Mundhe said, as reported by The Times of India. The Hindu reported that the Joint Commissioner is the authority that will adjudicate the case.

What the FDA alleges

Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff came together for the Vimal Elaichi ad campaign in 2024, according to The Hindu. In August 2026, the Maharashtra FDA issued show-cause notices to all three, alleging that advertisements for the cardamom-flavoured mouth freshener amount to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a product prohibited in the state.

Surrogate advertising, as The Indian Express explained, is the practice of promoting products that are banned or restricted from advertising, such as alcohol, tobacco and pan masala, by marketing another product under the same brand name, logo or visual style. Maharashtra has prohibited gutkha and pan masala containing tobacco or nicotine since 2012, with the prohibition renewed every year; the current order has been in force since July 13, 2026, the paper reported.

The notices cite Sections 24 and 53 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which deal with misleading food advertisements and penalise those involved in publishing them, India Today reported. Section 53 provides for a penalty of up to Rs 10 lakh for anyone who is a "party to the publication" of such an advertisement. The actors were given 15 days to respond with written explanations and supporting documents.

According to Devgn's petition, as quoted by LiveLaw, the notice asks him to "immediately discontinue his participation in and endorsement of the said Advertisement," remove the promotional material from platforms under his control, provide details of the due diligence he carried out and of the endorsement agreement, and explain "why legal action should not be initiated against him." The notice also carries a "Final Warning" that further action may follow if no explanation is received or if the explanation is found unsatisfactory.

Devgn's challenge in court

LiveLaw reported that Devgn replied to the notice in September, maintaining that he took part only in an advertisement for Vimal Elaichi and did not endorse Vimal Pan Masala. His petition argues that the notice is, in effect, a decision the FDA has already taken. "The Impugned SCN is also ex facie violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and of the principles of natural justice," the plea states, describing the notice as "mala fide, patently illegal and wholly arbitrary."

According to The Hindu and Bar & Bench, the petition contends that the notice was served on Devgn as an actor rather than on the company that makes the product, and it challenges the constitutional validity of provisions of the food safety regulations. The Hindu also reported that Devgn has argued he should be excused from the proceedings because he is no longer associated with the brand.

The petition is likely to be heard by a division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna, according to LiveLaw and The Hindu. Bar & Bench reported that Devgn is represented by DSK Legal, with a team led by partners Parag Khandhar and Chandrima Mitra.

An earlier challenge in Delhi

The Bombay High Court petition follows an unsuccessful attempt by the manufacturer to have the notices set aside in Delhi. PB Agro LLP, which The Hindu described as a licensee for the manufacture and sale of elaichi and of pan masala not containing tobacco under the Vimal brand, approached the Delhi High Court. On Sept. 14, that court declined to entertain the plea, observing that courts in Maharashtra were the appropriate forum for the challenge, The Hindu reported. Bar & Bench reported that the Delhi court ruled it lacked territorial jurisdiction because the dispute concerned action taken by the FDA over alleged activities in Maharashtra.

Similar notices were served on Shah Rukh Khan and Tiger Shroff, Bar & Bench reported. Mundhe said on Oct. 30 that all three actors had responded to the notices and sought additional time to submit their explanations, Moneycontrol reported.

The adjudication is expected to proceed before the Joint Commissioner while the Bombay High Court considers Devgn's petition. India Today reported in August that the Food Safety Act, unlike the Consumer Protection Act, does not specifically mention endorsers or brand ambassadors, and that treating an actor as a party to the publication of an advertisement is a possible interpretation of the law but not a settled one. Bombay High Court advocate Sankalpa Rajpurohit told the outlet that the FDA itself cannot levy the Rs 10 lakh penalty. "The penalty can only be imposed by an Adjudicating Officer of at least the rank of Additional District Magistrate under Section 68 [FSS Act, 2006]," he said.