New Delhi: The Kerala High Court Thursday sought the Centre’s response on a plea claiming that the cover of Arundhati Roy’s latest Mother Mary Comes to Me violates anti-tobacco law and glorifies smoking as it carries without the mandatory statutory warning a portrait of the author smoking a cigarette.
The Public Interest Litigation, filed by lawyer Rajasimhan Wednesday, claims the book cover suggests smoking is a symbol of intellectual and creative expression.
The PIL seeks a ban on the sale of the book unless the mandatory statutory warning is printed on the cover.
However, the book’s back cover has a disclaimer which says, “Any depiction of smoking in this book is for representational purposes only. Penguin Random House does not promote or endorse tobacco use.”
A two-judge bench of Chief Justice Nitin Madhukar Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji was hearing the PIL which said the depiction of smoking without the statutory health warning was a clear violation of the provisions of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act.
The law was enacted in 2003 to control tobacco use by ways such as restricting its promotion, advertising and sale among minors.
The cover of the widely available book conveys a “thoroughly misleading” and “unhealthy” message to the impressionable youth that smoking is fashionable, intellectually stimulating and intrinsically associated with creativity, said the PIL.
“In disregard of the settled legal principles, the impugned cover page of the book prominently depicts the celebrity author smoking a cigarette, without any statutory warning such as ‘Smoking is injurious to health’ or ‘Tobacco causes cancer’ which is mandatory under Sections 7 & 8 of COTPA, 2003, read with the 2008 Rules,” the plea argues.
Also Read: Arundhati Roy’s new book is a masterclass in marketing. Penguin started planning a year ago
The issues flagged
Section 7 of the COTPA states that no person can produce, supply, distribute or import any tobacco products unless every tobacco product package carries a specified warning, including a pictorial warning, as may be prescribed by the rules.
Section 8 of the 2003 Act mandates that such a specified warning on the cigarette pack or on any other tobacco product should be legible and prominent, conspicuous as to its size and colour, and in such style or type of lettering, which is boldly and clearly presented in a distinct contrast to any other type of lettering.
The plea invoked these provisions of the tobacco regulation law, and also cited Article 21 of the Constitution, which pertains to the fundamental right to life, and the right to health and clean living.
The petitioner also cited Article 47 of the Constitution, which states that it’s the duty of the State to improve public health and to take effective steps to discourage and prohibit the consumption of harmful substances, including tobacco.
Besides this, sections 5 and 22 of the COTPA prohibit direct and indirect advertisements of cigarettes and tobacco products, and punish their contravention with up to two years imprisonment or a thousand-rupee fine, or both, said the petitioner.
Apart from this, the plea relied on Rule 4 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Rules, 2004, which strictly prohibits smoking in public places, and the Delhi High Court’s ruling in Mahesh Bhatt vs Union of India, where the depiction of smoking without statutory warnings was held impermissible.
Such depiction of smoking amounted to its indirect advertisement and promoted smoking and tobacco products, the plea said, while adding that since Arundhati Roy is a globally renowned public intellectual, her actions exert a strong influence over the youth and the reading public, particularly teenage girls and women.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)
Also Read: Arundhati Roy at Kochi book launch: ‘Everyone I love is here. Dangerous, given our govt’
Those who smoke are called morons, not intellectuals. Most of the left morons are chain smokers.