City
Epaper

HC rejects Jain Trust's petition to ban advertisement of non veg foods

By Lokmat English Desk | Updated: September 26, 2022 20:25 IST

The Bombay High Court has rejected the petition filed by Jain Trust which sought a ban on advertisements of ...

Open in App

The Bombay High Court has rejected the petition filed by Jain Trust which sought a ban on advertisements of non-vegetarian foods, saying that the petitioners were trying to encroach on the rights of others by seeking such a ban.

The bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar said the issue falls within the domain of the legislature, and it cannot frame rules and laws imposing bans.

They heard a public interest litigation (PIL) by Shree Trustee Atma Kamal Labdhisurishwarji Jain Gyanmandir Trust from Dadar, Seth Motisha Religious and Charitable Trust from Byculla and Shri Vardhaman Parivar from Opera House and a businessman Jyotindra Shah.

The PIL said the advertisements are an utter violation of fundamental rights to life including to live in peace and privacy.

As soon as the petition came up for hearing, the bench clarified that the court can intervene only when rights are infringed. “First of all, tell us, is it within our jurisdiction? You are asking the high court to frame rules and guidelines to ban something. It is for the legislature to decide.”

The court went on to say that the petitioners were effectively encroaching upon the rights of others by seeking such a ban. "What about violation of Article 19 of the Constitution? Why are you encroaching on others' rights? There are two ways of looking at it. An ordinary man would say switch off the TV. But we would look at it from the point of law. What you are asking has to be provided by law. Here there is no such law, which is why you are asking us to frame the law.”

"You are asking for a direction to the government to pass orders to ban something. This falls within the domain of the legislation. The High court, in a writ petition, cannot say what legislation can be enacted," said CJ Datta. 

The advocate then sought the court’s permission to amend the plea, which the court said could not be allowed. The Court then allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea, stating that the petitioner could file a "fresh petition with better material".

Tags: Bombay High CourtPublic Interest LitigationOpera HouseGovernment
Open in App

Related Stories

MaharashtraReligion Is One Consideration In Custody Cases, But Child Welfare Is Primary Factor: Bombay High Court

MaharashtraHusband’s Plea for Action Against Wife Over Explicit Viral Video Dismissed by Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court

National‘Question Kunal Kamra In Chennai’: Bombay HC To Police; Grants Protection From Arrest

Navi MumbaiNavi Mumbai: ‘Dog Mafia’ Slur Lands Seawoods Resident in Jail; Bombay HC Orders 7‑Day Term for Contempt

MaharashtraDevendra Fadnavis Summoned by HC in Petition Challenging His 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Poll Win

Maharashtra Realted Stories

MaharashtraMaharashtra Accident: 3 Killed, 2 Injured as Truck Rams Into Cars in Solapur

MaharashtraUPSC Cheating Case: Pooja Khedkar Denies Allegations of Exam Fraud, Name Change and Fake Disability Certificate

MumbaiMumbai Local Train Update: Western Railway Announces 4-Hour Mega Block Between Mumbai Central and Mahim on May 3–4

NashikNashik Crime: History-Sheeter Allegedly Attacked and killed by Criminal Over Argument; One Arrested

MaharashtraTravel Between Panvel and Hazur Sahib Nanded Will Become Smooth As Central Railway Announces Trains With New LHB Coaches