Shrink pictorial warning on tobacco products, rules Karnataka HC

BENGALURU: In a major judgment, the Karnataka High Court on Friday struck down the rule that stipulated 85 per cent pictorial health warnings on cigarette packs.

The court termed Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labelling) Amendment Rules, 2014, unconstitutional and unreasonable. The HC was hearing a batch of petitions, filed by tobacco companies challenging the rules, on directions of the Supreme Court. The court also made it clear that the 40 per cent pictorial health warning rule, which existed prior to the amendment rules, would remain in force.

The division bench of Justices B S Patil and B V Nagarathna said, “We hold that Amendment Rule 2014 is struck down as being in violation of the Constitution of India. Union of India is at liberty to reconsider the matter in the light of these orders.”Last May, the SC had transferred all petitions filed in various high courts to the Karnataka High Court and asked it to hear and dispose of them.

Tobacco Institute of India and other petitioners had challenged enforcement of the rules, contending that they interfere with their right to speech and expression and affect their business.Giving reasons for Friday’s ruling, Justice Patil said the health ministry unilaterally framed rules without concurrence of other departments. He said the Ministry of Commerce had termed the rules as not beneficial while Labour ministry had contended that beedi industry was affected.

Contending that tobacco control and legislation are not attached to one department or ministry. the bench said the rules are in violation of Article 77(3) and Transaction of Business Rules.Justice Nagarathna said the rules also violate Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution as there was no application of mind to prescribe 85 per cent nor was it in consonance to parliamentary committee’s recommendation or expert committee. The judge observed that for contents of specified health warning, no data or empirical research was conducted or placed before the court.

Court’s contention

2014 rules prescribing 85 per cent pictorial warning unconstitutional, unreasonable
Tobacco control and legislation are not attached to one dept or ministry
Rules framed unilaterally by health ministry without other depts’ assent
No data or empirical research was conducted to justify warning
Rules don’t conform to parliamentary panel’s recommendation