http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: LAXMIKANT

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       11/04/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.  We have heard counsel on both sides.      This appeal, by special leave, arises from the judgment passed by  the Madhya  Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur Bench, on November 23, 1995.      The appellant  is a  manufacturer of tooth paste, using tobacco as  one of  the ingredients  therein. The Government exercising the  power under  section 33-DDE of the Drugs and cosmetics  Act,   1940  (   for  short,  the  "Act")  issued notification as under :      "MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY      WELFARE (DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH)                 NOTIFICATION      New Delhi, the 30th April, 1992.           GSR-443(E),  Whereas,      the      Central Government  is satisfied on      the basis  of  evidence  and  other      material before  it that the use of      tobacco   in    tooth-pastes/tooth-      powders is  likely to  involve risk      to  human   beings  and   that   is      necessary  and   expedient  in  the      public interest so to do;           Now ,   therefore, in exercise      of  powers   conferred  by  section      33(EED) of  the Drugs and cosmetics      Act, 1940 (23 of 1949,  the Central      Government  hereby   prohibit   the      manufacture   and   sale   of   all      Ayurvedic Drugs  license as  tooth-      pastes/tooth-powders     containing      tobacco.       (No.X.11014/3/91-DM-S & PFA) H.S.            Lamba, Jt. secy."      Calling that  notification in  question,  the appellant filed a  writ petition in the High court. The High court has upheld the  notification and  dismissed the  same. Thus this appeal, by special leave.      When the matter came up before this court for admission on 30.7.1996,  this court noted as under:

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

    "The petitioner  has  impugned  the      notification of the Govt. of India,      Ministry  of   Health  and   Family      welfare dated  30.4.92  prohibiting      the   use   of   tobacco   in   the      manufacture  and   sales   of   all      Ayurvedic  drugs   including  tooth      powder and  tooth paste  containing      tobacco.     The  High   Court   on      elaborate consideration  upheld the      bar prohibiting the use of tobacco.      Shri R.F.  Nariman, learned counsel      for the  petitioner, contends  that      was prohibited  was use  of 50% and      more of  tobacco in the preparation      of the  Ayurvedic  drugs  including      tooth power  containing tobacco. If      petitioner   is   using   only   4%      tobacco. If  there is  evidence  or      reports to  indicate that  even  4%      tobacco  also  would  not  mind  to      close the  manufacturing  of  tooth      paste  and  tooth  powder.    Issue      notice on this limited question."      On that  basis,   notice was issued.  Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents stating that the view that there  should  be  total  ban  of  use  of  tobacco  in  the preparation of  tooth paste  was taken  by the Government in consultation with  the Export  committee constituted in that behalf and  that, therefore,  the notification  is valid  in law, Shri R.F. Nariman, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, contended that in view of the divergent views expressed by  the members  of the  Board, total  ban is  not correct proposition;  the permitted  use of  4% would not be injurious to the health of the user of tooth paste and that, therefore, the  view taken  is not factually correct in law. We find no force in the contention.      It is  an admitted  position that  the Expert  Body  of Ayurvedic, Siddha  and Unani  Drugs Technical Advisory Board was constituted  under section 33-EED of the Act.  The Board has gone into the question and opined under :      "The Board  has in  depth discussed      the  side   effects   of   Nicotine      compared to its advantage as a drug      in tooth  powder and  tooth  paste.      Since   there    are   many    safe      antiseptics  available,  the  Board      unanimously decided  that there  is      no rationality  in using tobacco in      the   tooth    powder/pastes    and      approved, the  action taken  by the      Government, in  public interest  in      prohibiting  tobacco  in  Ayurvedic      Drugs."      It is  true that  various  authorities  have  expressed their views  in this behalf. But on consideration of various views the committee ultimately decided thus:      "Considering   the   various   view      points, the  committee decided that      manufacturers should  be told  that      use  of   tooth  pastes  or  powers      containing tobacco  is fraught with      the risk  of cancer  and  dissuaded      from marketing  such  products.  In      the case  of Orissa,  the  Chairman

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

    agreed  to  a  communication  being      sent  by   the  D.G.H.S.    to  the      Director of  medical Education  and      Training to  discourage the  use of      Gudakhu in  Orissa, copies  of this      letter would  be  endorsed  to  the      Director  of   Medical  and  Health      service in other states and also to      the Members of the committee."      Similar view  was also  expressed at  an  International Seminar held  on 27th  and 28th  July,  1991  at  All  India Institute of  Medical sciences, New Delhi and the Conference also made similar  recommendations which read thus:      "The     conference      recognised      tobacco  as   major  public  health      hazard  and   also  noted  that  on      further  research   was  needed  to      start tobacco  control  activities,      as sufficient  scientific  evidence      is already available about the ill-      effects on  health due  to  use  of      tobacco    besides     its    being      addictive."      Therefore,  the   International  conference   held   in collaboration with  the world Health organisation was of the opinion that  the ban  on use of tobacco in tooth paste  and tooth powder  should totally be imposed since it is prone to cancer. Under  these circumstances,   the  view taken by the Government of India imposing total prohibition on the use of tobacco in  the preparation  of tooth powder and tooth paste is well  justified in the public interest covered by Article 19(6)   of the  constitution, though it offends the right to carry  on  trade  guaranteed  under  Article  19(1)  of  the constitution.    The  imposition of  total  ban  is  in  the public interest.      The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.