The Supreme Court of India today dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) that challenged the cover of author Arundhati Roy’s book, “Mother Mary Comes To Me,” which features a photograph of her smoking a bidi without a statutory health warning.
A bench led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) heard the plea and concluded that the book’s cover image did not constitute a violation of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COTPA).
CJI: “We See No Reason to Interfere”
During the brief hearing, the CJI unequivocally stated that the depiction on the book cover did not fall under the ambit of the Act’s prohibitions.
CJI: “The book does not constitute any violation of the Prohibition and Regulation Act (of Cigarettes)…we see no reason to interfere in the present plea, the SLP is dismissed.”
Legal Background of the Case
The SLP was filed against an earlier decision by the Kerala High Court, which had previously dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) raising the same issue.
The original petitioner, a lawyer, had argued that the image of a globally renowned public intellectual like Arundhati Roy smoking on the book cover, without the mandated warning like “smoking is injurious to health,” amounted to an indirect advertisement and glorification of tobacco use, particularly influencing young readers.
The Kerala High Court, however, had rejected the PIL, noting that:
- The petitioner had failed to disclose that the publisher, Penguin Random House India, had included a written disclaimer on the back cover of the book stating the depiction was for “representation purposes only” and did not endorse tobacco use.
- The issue was primarily regulatory and should have first been raised before the Steering Committee, the expert statutory authority constituted under the COTPA Act.
- The court cautioned against the misuse of PILs for “self-publicity.”
By dismissing the SLP, the Supreme Court has confirmed the view that the legal framework for tobacco control, particularly concerning advertisements and packaging, does not extend to curtailing literary or artistic expression on book covers.
