The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has stayed the execution of bailable warrants issued against Salman Khan in a complaint over a misleading advertisement the Bollywood actor featured in [Salman Salim Khan v. Yogendra Badiyal].

The Commission also called for the entire record of the case, including contempt proceedings under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, to examine the issues raised.

A coram of President Justice (retd) AP Sahi and Member Bharatkumar Pandey directed the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to summon the records from the District Commission and forward them to the NCDRC through a special messenger.

“All further proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders shall remain stayed,” the Commission said.

It further directed that execution of any warrants issued by the district commission shall remain in abeyance till disposal of the matter.

Notice has been issued to the complainant, Advocate Yogendra Singh Badiyal.

The matter is scheduled to be heard on April 15, 2026.

Yesterday, Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash, appearing for Khan, submitted that the district commission had proceeded in a coercive and disproportionate manner. He argued that applications seeking certified copies of the orders were still pending, even as those orders had already appeared in media reports.

It was further submitted that coercive steps, including issuance of bailable warrants, were taken without proper service of orders on Khan.

Prakash also pointed out that the district commission had directed constitution of a Special Task Force to secure Khan’s presence. He submitted that such directions were highly unusual in consumer proceedings.

Taking note of these concerns, the NCDRC observed that examination of the original record was necessary to appreciate the issues raised.

The case arises from a complaint filed in December 2025 before the Jaipur District Consumer Commission against Rajshree Pan Masala and Salman Khan.

The complaint alleges that the advertisement amounts to surrogate promotion of pan masala and constitutes a misleading advertisement under the Consumer Protection Act.

Khan was arrayed as Opposite Party No. 2 in his capacity as brand ambassador for “Rajshree Elaichi”.

On January 6, 2026, the district commission passed an interim order directing the respondents to refrain from issuing misleading advertisements.

According to Khan’s plea, the order was passed ex parte and without notice to him.

A contempt application under Section 72 was later filed alleging violation of this order based on a hoarding featuring Khan.

On January 15, 2026, the District Commission issued bailable warrants against Khan in the contempt proceedings. Khan challenged the order before the Rajasthan State Commission under Section 73 (appeal against enforcement orders).

By judgment dated March 16, 2026, the State Commission dismissed the appeal and upheld the issuance of bailable warrants.

Salman Khan was represented by Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash, briefed by Advocates Parag Khandhar and Chandrima Mitra from DSK Legal.

Rajshree was represented by Advocates Varun Singh, Shiker Upadhyay and Utkarsh Sahu from Foresight Law Offices India.