Purpose Of Displaying Distasteful Anti-Tobacco Imagery In Movies & TV Programmes Is To Make People Aware Of Ailments Of Tobacco: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has observed that the purpose of displaying distasteful anti-tobacco imagery during screening of movies and TV programmes is to make people aware of ailments of consuming tobacco.
The petitioner, a young Advocate had approached the court for a writ or direction to the respondent for prohibiting the display of anti-tobacco health spots during films in cinemas, on TV and on OTT, which contain graphic or gross images.
A Single Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said, “With a view to deter people from smoking tobacco and tobacco products, the Government of India has brought in advertisements to educate people about the ill effects of tobacco and tobacco products. The graphic description given in these Government issued advertisements which, according to the Petitioner, are gross and graphic imagery, are in fact meant to be eye-openers for the people not to use tobacco and tobacco products and is, therefore, in public interest. The purpose of display of distasteful, gross, graphic anti-tobacco imagery in the health spots played during the screening of movies and TV programmes is only to make people aware of the ailments and ill-effects of consuming tobacco and tobacco products and to show them what tobacco can do to their health.”
The Bench also said that it is the duty of the State to take steps to ensure that health of the people is protected.
Advocate Divyam Aggarwal appeared as a petitioner in person while ASG Chetan Sharma and CGSC Ajay Digpaul appeared for the respondents.
The writ petition was filed due to the incorporation and prevalence of distasteful, gross, graphic anti-tobacco imagery in the health spots played during the screening of movies and TV programmes. The health risks associated from smoking tobacco and related products are multifarious in nature. Smoking is widely recognized as a pivotal factor responsible for the onset of lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD), and a significant contributor to coronary heart disease. Additionally, it has been linked to a plethora of health issues, including different types of cancer, cerebrovascular and peripheral vascular diseases, and peptic ulcer disease. Smokers also experience a higher frequency of acute respiratory illnesses.
The High Court in that regard noted, “Smokers face seventy percent higher mortality rate than non-smokers and such risks escalate in proportion to the duration and quantity of smoking. Excess mortality in smokers’ leading contributors are Coronary heart diseases, followed by lung cancer and COPD. Smoking significantly shortens life expectancy and specifically, tobacco smoke, when dissolved in saliva and ingested, exposes the upper gastrointestinal tract to carcinogens.”
The Court said that male smokers face a much higher risk of developing lung cancer and is also correlated to the number of cigarettes smoked and additionally, there is also compelling evidence linking smoking to cancers of the larynx, oral cavity, and oesophagus, with the risk intensifying with increased exposure to cigarette smoke, whether active or passive.
“The present Writ Petition is a gross abuse of the process of law. Off late, this Court is seeing that Public Interest Litigation, which was actually a tool for providing voice to the voiceless, is being used to achieve private gains and the present Writ Petition is also one such Petition which has been backed by the tobacco industry lobby to prevent the Government from creating awareness against tobacco, which, as stated earlier, is the sole cause responsible for a number of ailments among men and women”, held the Court.
The Court further noted that the aim of such a writ petition is actually to restrain the Government from achieving a noble objective of a tobacco free State and to ensure that people do not become tobacco addicts.
“The present Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs but looking at the Petitioner, who is a young Advocate having a bright future ahead, this Court restrains itself from making any comments on the Petitioner which might have a bearing on his future. However, this Court warns the Petitioner not to file such kind of frivolous petitions in future”, concluded the Court.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the petition.
Cause Title- Divyam Aggarwal v. Union of India & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2023:DHC:7145)
