Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner Tukaram Mundhe has questioned celebrities and public figures endorsing paan and gutka products, saying they should apply the same standards to themselves and their families that they promote to the public.
“If you are advertising paan or gutka, then you should consume it first. Let your children consume it and make it a habit. Then tell everyone else to do it. Why should it work the other way around?” Mundhe said at an NDTV event recently.
His remarks come amid the FDA's action against Bollywood actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff over their appearance in a Vimal Elaichi advertisement. The regulator has alleged that the campaign could amount to surrogate or indirect promotion of pan masala or tobacco-related products.
FDA questions responsibility of celebrity endorsers
Mundhe said people should not maintain one set of standards in their personal lives and another while working professionally. If a person publicly tells people that a product is good, he said, the same standard should apply to the person promoting it.
The FDA commissioner also criticised what he described as sycophancy and maintaining different standards in different situations.
“I hate to be a sycophant. Anybody. I hate sycophancy. Double standards, multiple standards, multiple faces, I don't like them,” he said, according to the NDTV report.
Mundhe's comments underline the FDA's position that celebrities and other public figures cannot completely distance themselves from responsibility for products they endorse, particularly when those products raise questions under food-safety and advertising laws.
He also rejected the argument that actors appearing in advertisements are merely the faces of campaigns and therefore have no responsibility for the products they promote.
Addressing the argument that an actor or other celebrity is only a “commercial person” and that responsibility lies with the producer, Mundhe said: “That is not the case.”
He said an endorsement was not merely about lending one's face to a brand and that public figures also had a responsibility to understand what they were asking people to consume or believe.
Mundhe said the issue went beyond personal morality or ethics and extended to the legal responsibilities of sponsors. He said the law does not permit misleading claims relating to food or drugs.
FDA issued notices over Vimal Elaichi advertisement
The Maharashtra FDA issued show-cause notices dated August 11, 2026, to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff over their participation in the Vimal Elaichi campaign.
The regulator alleged that the advertisement could amount to surrogate advertising for Vimal Pan Masala, whose manufacture and sale are prohibited in Maharashtra. The notice also said the Vimal brand was “prominently associated with Pan Masala in the market”.
The notices were issued under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and related regulations. The actors were given 15 days from the date of receipt to submit written explanations.
The FDA warned that failure to respond, or an explanation found to be unsatisfactory, could result in further action under applicable law.
The notices cited Section 24 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, which deals with misleading advertisements, while Section 53 provides for penalties for publishing or being party to the publication of misleading food advertisements. Reports on the notices said the penalty under Section 53 can extend to ₹10 lakh.
The regulator had also asked the actors to provide documents relating to the Vimal Elaichi campaign and questioned whether the advertisement created an association with the Vimal Pan Masala brand.
All three actors have now responded
The case has since moved forward after all three actors responded to the FDA notices.
Mundhe said on September 29 that responses had been received from Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff. Two of them also sought hearings, and those hearings were completed on September 28. The FDA said it would proceed further in the matter.
The latest development follows an earlier statement from Mundhe in which he had said that one of the three actors had not responded to the notices and that proceedings had been initiated against that actor. At the time, he had also said the two actors who had responded would have their replies considered.
Mundhe had earlier described the actors, in the context of the regulatory proceedings, as advertisers rather than treating their status as film stars as relevant to the FDA's action.
The FDA's proceedings are centred on whether the Vimal Elaichi advertisement amounts to indirect or surrogate promotion of a prohibited pan masala product in Maharashtra. The actors' responses and subsequent hearings will form part of the regulator's consideration of the matter.