Highlights
- Maharashtra’s Food and Drug Administration has issued show-cause notices to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff over Vimal Elaichi advertisements
- The regulator says the campaigns may indirectly promote a pan masala product associated with the Vimal brand
- The actors have been asked to remove the advertisements from social media and explain their endorsements within 15 days
- India’s pan masala market was estimated at around £3.7 billion last year, based on the reported $5 billion valuation and the August 17, 2026 exchange rate of about $1.356 per £1
Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff have been caught up in Maharashtra’s latest crackdown on surrogate advertising, after the state’s food safety regulator questioned their involvement in Vimal Elaichi campaigns.
The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asked the three actors to explain why action should not be taken against them, arguing that the advertisements for cardamom may help maintain consumer recognition of Vimal’s pan masala products.
The notices do not allege that the actors were directly advertising a prohibited tobacco product. Instead, the dispute centres on whether the legal product being advertised is effectively being used to keep a restricted product’s brand visible.
Why Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff are under scrutiny
The controversy centres on Vimal Elaichi, a cardamom product promoted under the same Vimal branding that is strongly associated with pan masala.
According to Maharashtra FDA, the advertisement appears to promote a brand “mainly associated with pan masala”, raising concerns that the campaign could amount to surrogate advertising. The practice involves using a legal product, such as cardamom, to maintain the visibility of a brand whose primary product cannot be openly advertised.
The regulator has asked the actors to remove related promotional material from their social media accounts, stop cooperating with further broadcasts of the advertisements and provide information about their endorsement agreements. They have been given 15 days to respond.
The actors and Vimal’s brand owner had not responded to Reuters’ requests for comment when the report was published.
The £3.7 billion industry behind the controversy
The dispute puts a spotlight on an industry that has become a major commercial force in India. Reuters reported that industry estimates value India’s pan masala market at around $5 billion, equivalent to roughly £3.7 billion at the August 17 exchange rate.
Health experts have raised concerns about products containing tobacco or areca nut, with areca nut consumption associated with oral submucous fibrosis, a condition that can progress to oral cancer.
The distinction between pan masala and products such as elaichi has nevertheless allowed brands to continue using familiar names and visual identities in advertising. That is precisely what Maharashtra authorities are now examining.
The Vimal campaign featuring Khan, Devgn and Shroff has received enormous visibility online. One of the advertisements, set during a festive celebration in which the three stars throw saffron powder at one another, has reportedly accumulated more than 100 million views on YouTube.
Why surrogate advertising remains controversial in India
The use of legal products to promote brands associated with restricted goods has been debated in India for years.
Liquor companies, for instance, have previously faced criticism for promoting their brands through products and merchandise carrying the same names and logos. In 2024, Reuters reported that the central government was considering tighter rules targeting such surrogate advertising, although those rules had not been finalised.
Maharashtra’s latest action therefore goes beyond three celebrity endorsements. It raises a larger question about how far a legally permissible product can be advertised when its branding is closely tied to a prohibited or harmful product.
For Khan, Devgn and Shroff, the immediate issue is now their response to the FDA notices. The proceedings are at the show-cause stage, meaning the regulator has sought explanations before deciding whether further action is warranted.
