Vimal Elaichi Ad Row Puts Surrogate Advertising Under The Spotlight

The makers of Vimal Elaichi have approached the Delhi High Court seeking to quash show-cause notices issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to brand ambassadors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff over alleged surrogate advertising of pan masala.

PB Agro, which markets Vimal Elaichi, challenged the August 11, 2026 notices, arguing that the advertisements promote a legal cardamom product and do not amount to indirect promotion of Vimal Pan Masala. The company said its endorsement agreements with the actors comply with applicable laws and alleged that the Maharashtra FDA did not issue the notice to the company itself, despite it being directly affected by any regulatory action. It also claimed it was not given an opportunity to be heard.

The Maharashtra FDA has alleged that the Vimal Elaichi campaign could amount to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a product prohibited in Maharashtra. The regulator asked the actors to provide documents establishing that Vimal Elaichi is distinct from the banned pan masala products and sought a halt to the campaign and removal of promotional material from digital platforms.

Surrogate advertising has become a major regulatory concern in India because companies can potentially use legal products to maintain the visibility of brands associated with products whose advertising is restricted. The 2022 CCPA guidelines prohibit surrogate and indirect advertising of goods or services whose advertising is prohibited or restricted by law. The framework also places responsibilities on endorsers, who are expected to exercise due diligence before promoting products.

PB Agro has argued that the allegations are baseless, saying Vimal Pan Masala has not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001. It also questioned the FDA's jurisdiction to order a halt to the advertisements.

Meanwhile, counsel for the Centre and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) argued that the company should approach the Bombay High Court because the notices were issued by a Maharashtra government authority. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has reserved her order on the preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction. The court has not yet ruled on whether the advertisements constitute surrogate advertising.

The case comes amid increasing scrutiny of celebrity endorsements. Indian courts and regulators have emphasised that advertisers and endorsers can share responsibility for misleading advertisements, making due diligence increasingly important for celebrities promoting consumer brands.