INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION versus OZAIR HUSAIN AND OTHERS

Citation: [2013] 4 S.C.R. 675 · Decided: 07-03-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.S. SINGHVI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

(2013] 4 S.C.R. 675 
INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION 
v. 
OZAIR HUSAIN AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 5644 of 2003) 
MARCH 7, 2013 
[G.S. SINGHVI AND SUDHANSU JYOTI 
MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 - Drugs and 
Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Drugs - Ingredients of - Disclosure -
C 
Vegetarian I non-vegetarian - High Court in exercise of 
jurisdiction u/Art. 226 of the Constitution directing the drug 
manufacturers to display a particular symbol in the packages 
of drugs other than life saving drugs to identify the ingredients 
of 'non-vegetarian'! 'vegetarian' origin - Justification - Held: In 
D 
a· given circumstance, the condition of a patient may be such 
that a drug ordinarily not treated as a life saving drug may be 
essential to save the life - In such a case when drug becomes 
a life saving drug, it may not be desirable for the patient or 
his attendant to know the origin of the ingredients of the drug E 
i.e. whether 'vegetarian' or 'non-vegetarian' -Also, in individual 
cases, the Central Government may feel difficulty in specifying 
the origin of a 'vegetarian' or 'non-vegetarian' ingredient, if a 
person wants to know the definite origin of such 'vegetarian' 
or 'non-vegetarian' ingredient on the basis of his food habit -
F 
Under the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, the Central 
Government in consultation with the Drug Technical Advisory 
Board is empowered to decide whether any amendment is to 
be made in the relevant Rules showing the ingredients of 
vegetarian or non-vegetarian origin or to provide a symbol -
G 
Without fruitful consultation with the Advisory Board, no 
amendment can be made or suggested to change the label 
of the drugs and cosmetics - On an earlier reference, the 
Advisory Board had aiready opined that the labelling of drugs 
675 
H 
676 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013) 4 S.C.R. 
A 
as 'vegetarian' or 'non-vegetarian' or 'from animal sources' is 
not desirable - High Court u!Art. 226 had no jurisdiction to 
direct the Executive to exercise power by way of subordinate 
Legislation pursuant to power delegated by the Legislature to 
enact a Jaw in a particular manner, as was done in the present 
B 
case - For the same reason, it was also not open to the High 
Court to suggest any interim arrangement as was given by 
the impugned judgment - Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 226. 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Art.19(1)(a) and 19(2) -
Freedom of speech and expression - Right to receive 
C 
information - Held: The freedom of speech and expression 
includes the right to receive information - But such right can 
be limited by reasonable restrictions under the law made for 
the purpose mentioned in Art. 19(2) - It is imperative for the 
State to ensure the availability of the right to the citizens to 
D receive information - But such information can be given to the 
extent it is available and possible, without affecting the 
fundamental right of others. 
The respondent filed writ petition (Public Interest 
E 
Litigation) claiming the right of a consumer of cosmetics, 
drugs and articles of food to the full disclosure of 
ingredients of such product whereby a clear indication 
as to its origin (vegetarian/non-vegetarian) is made. 
The High Court by the impugned judgment held that 
F 
the consumer has the fundamental right to know whether 
the drugs other than life saving drugs are of non-
vegetarian or vegetarian origin and gave a finding to 
provide certain mark on the labelling of such drugs 
based on vegetarian or non-vegetarian origin. 
G 
The questions involved in the instant appeals were: 
(i) Whether under Article 226 of the Constitution of 
India, the High Court had jurisdiction to direct the 
H manufacturers of drugs and cosmetics to display a 
INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION v. 
677 
OZAIR HUSAIN 
particular symbol in their packages to identify the 
A 
ingredients of• non- vegetarian' or• vegetarian' origin; (ii) 
Whether it was practicable and desirable to display any 
identification as to the origin of the non-vegetarian 
ingredients in the packages of drugs and cosmetics and 
iii) Whether the High Court was justified in issuing a writ 
B 
of mandamus calling upon the Central Government to 
discharge its duty by amending the rules. 
Allowing the appeals, the. Court 
HELD: 1.1. The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 or C 
the rules framed thereunder do not mandate mentioning 
or displaying symbol of ingredients of non-vegetarian or 
vegetarian origin. T
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.