[Plea Against Anti-Tobacco Warning] Delhi High Court Expunges Remarks Against Lawyer, Accepts Unconditional Apology

Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

Court asserted that the purpose of displaying graphic anti-tobacco imagery was to raise awareness about the health risks of tobacco consumption

The Delhi High Court has expunged certain remarks made against a lawyer by a single judge, who dismissed his plea challenging the display of anti-tobacco health spots featuring graphic images during film screenings.

The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna, accepted the unconditional apology tendered by the lawyer petitioner and dismissed the appeal challenging the single judge's decision.

The single judge earlier deemed the lawyer's petition a "gross abuse of the process of law".

The judge asserted that the purpose of displaying graphic anti-tobacco imagery was to raise awareness about the health risks of tobacco consumption. The petitioner initially argued that the imagery used by the Center was extremely gross and spoiled the movie-watching experience.

During the appeal hearing, the lawyer's counsel expressed a decision not to press the appeal on its merits.

The division bench, in response to the unconditional apology, expunged the remarks made by the single judge and dismissed the appeal, along with pending applications.

The petitioner's lawyer clarified in the apology that his intent was never to promote tobacco consumption and expressed regret for any misunderstanding.

Last week, the division bench urged the lawyer to file an affidavit expressing regret, noting the need for a "course correction." The court had also raised concerns about the petition possibly being "sponsored litigation."

Under the Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) rules, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issues anti-tobacco health spots to create awareness about the adverse effects of tobacco consumption.

The petitioner had argued against the prevalence of graphic imagery during movie screenings, contending that it was distasteful. The single judge emphasized the state's duty to protect citizens' health and supported the use of such health spots for awareness.

Case Title: Divyam Aggarwal V. Union Of India & Anr