Latest Newsletter News

Govt. should act on FMCG firms using ‘misleading’ ads: SC

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the Centre should “activate itself” against Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) companies if they employ “misleading advertisements” about their products to target credulous consumers, especially families with babies and schoolchildren.

“The misleading advertisements of FMCGs take the public for a ride, particularly families, affecting their health. The issue concerns even the health of babies and schoolchildren,” Justice Hima Kohli, heading a Bench with Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, observed.

The court voiced its concern amid recent reports alleging higher sugar content in Nestle’s baby food products sold in India as well as in African and Latin American countries. The Union Consumer Affairs Ministry has asked the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to investigate the allegations against the leading FMCG.

On Monday, the court widened the scope of the Patanjali Ayurved contempt case and decided to implead the Ministries of Consumer Affairs and Information and Broadcasting as parties in the case. Justice Kohli asked whether the Centre was taking any efforts to identify FMCG companies which resort to misleading advertisements, noting that the Advertising Standards Council of India had flagged 948 objectionable advertisements to the AYUSH Ministry in the past two years.

Justice Amanullah said he recently saw a channel flash news about the Supreme Court hearing in the case even as a part of the screen was taken up by an FMCG company’s misleading advertisement. “It was ironic,” Justice Amanullah said.

The remarks of the apex court comes while it is hearing a contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved, its co-founder and yoga guru Baba Ramdev and his associate Acharya Balkrishna for continuing to advertise their ayurvedic drugs in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act despite an undertaking given to the Supreme Court. While the company has issued a public apology, the SC has questioned its intent saying, “Is your apology as big and expensive as your front page advertisements?”.

On April 10, the Bench had similarly expressed its misgivings about the extent of vigil over products advertised and sold by FMCG companies.