The Rajasthan High Court recently stayed proceedings before a consumer fora against actor Salman Khan in a case concerning misleading advertisements of Rajshree Pan Masala [Salman Khan Vs Yogendra Singh Badiyal].
Justice Anuroop Singhi passed the order on a petition filed by Khan challenging orders of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Jaipur which had restrained the advertisements and also issued bailable warrants against Khan.
The District Commissions order had later been upheld by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Khan separately filed appeal against the same before the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) while also moving the High Court by way of the present writ petition challenging the consumer proceedings.
The High Court on April 7 stayed further proceedings in the consumer complaint pending before the District Commission against Khan and Rajshree Pan Masala.
The complaint was filed in December 2025 by advocate Yogendra Singh Badiyal against Rajshree Pan Masala and Salman Khan.
It alleged that advertisements for 'Rajshree Elaichi' was a surrogate ad for pan masala promotion and amounted to misleading advertisements under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Khan was arrayed as defendant in his capacity as brand ambassador.
Appearing for Khan, Senior Advocate GS Bapna argued that the actor had only endorsed the company’s “silver-coated elaichi” product and had never advertised or promoted pan masala. He submitted that the complaint was ex facie misconceived.
Bapna further contended that the District Consumer Commission lacked jurisdiction to entertain complaints relating to misleading advertisements, which fall within the domain of the Central Consumer Protection Authority.
It was also Khan’s case that the January 6 interim order by the District Commission was passed without notice and was never served on him. He argued that contempt of court proceedings under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act could not have been initiated in the absence of service, and that issuance of bailable warrants without recording such finding was unsustainable.
The High Court noted that Khan had moved the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) challenging the January 15 order issuing warrants and the NCDRC had on April 8 stayed the execution of bailable warrants issued against Khan by the District Commission.
Hence, it stayed the consumer proceedings and issued notice complainant Yogendra Singh Badiyal, seeking his response.
The Court also stayed proceedings against Kamal Kant & Company, the manufacturer of Rajshree Pan Masala.
The matter will be heard next on May 12.
The Court also stayed proceedings against Kamal Kant & Company, the manufacturer of Rajshree Pan Masala.
Khan was represented by Senior Advocate GS Bapna with advocates Shivangshu Naval, Parag Khandhar, Akanksha Noval, Ayush Sharma, Aarav Jain and Zara Dhanbhoora from DSK Legal.
Kamal Kant/ Rajshree Pan Masala was represented by Senior Advocate Major RP Singh assisted by advocates Divesh Sharma, Varun Singh and Shiker Upadhyah from Foresight law offices.
Advocate Himmat Singh appeared for the complainant Yogendra Singh Badiyal.
[Read Salman Khan Order]
[Read Kamal Kant Order]