Banning Chewable Tobacco (Gutka/Khaini) products in India under FSSA 2006; Policy and Practice–A way forward!

Dr. Omesh Kumar Bharti; Archana Phull; Ashok Mangla; R.K.Sood

Volume : V, Issue : II, February - 2015

Banning Chewable Tobacco (Gutka/Khaini) products in India under FSSA 2006; Policy and Practice–A way forward!

Dr. Omesh Kumar Bharti, Archana Phull, Ashok Mangla, R. K. Sood

Abstract :

Background and challenges to implementation: Gutka, Khaini etc are chewable (smokeless) tobacco products made of crushed betel nuts laced with tobacco/ Nicotine. The number of users of smokeless tobacco products (Gutka, Khaini) in India is more than double the number of smokers. 32.9% of men and 18.4% of women use smokeless tobacco products. Gutka and other smokeless tobacco which are consumed orally are highly addictive and toxic products owing to the amount of nicotine and tobacco content in them. India has the highest prevalence of oral cancer globally, with 75, 000 to 80, 000 new cases of oral cancers in a year. The Government of Himachal Pradesh banned smokeless tobacco on July 12, 2012 under newly enacted Food Safety and Standards Act–2006 (FSSA– 2006).The ban on smokeless tobacco was imposed without consideration of the corresponding penalties under FSSA–2006 for the violation. It became difficult to penalize the violators under a particular section of the act. The challenge was to innovate the ways to punish the guilty in a sufficiently deterrent way. The problem was solved by a combination of sections of the FSSA–2006 and penalties imposed probably for the first time in India under food act FSSA 2006 by a designated officer of the level of a medical doctor. Under section (1) of 69 of FSSA 2006, designated officer food safety is empowered to compound offences and levy penalty up to one lakh ($ 2000) in relation to offences committed by petty manufacturers of food items. The Government of Himachal Pradesh issued this notification vide no. Health–A–B(15)25/2012 dated 16 April, 2013. Intervention or response: A thorough understanding of the various penal provisions of the FSSA–2006 w.r.t. banning of the smokeless tobacco was done and combination of sections were underlined so as to not to dilute the final judgement. Section 57, 58, 55, 49, 72 were imposed, in pursuance of power conferred under this act. So, to punish the guilty a plethora of sections of the FSSA–2006 were innovatively interlinked and judgments delivered for the first time. We were able to successfully launch court proceedings against four such accused and fine them a maximum of one Lakh each ($ 2000).