Delhi High Court asks lawyer to tender apology for plea against anti-tobacco warnings on TV, movies

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday pulled up a lawyer who had filed a petition against display of anti-tobacco warning messages during movies and TV shows and asked him to file an affidavit of regret within two days. [Divyam Aggarwal V. Union Of India & Anr].The bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna asked the lawyer to file an affidavit of regret within two days. “He must give an affidavit of regret for what has happened, then we will expunge these observations. Absolute regret is needed in this matter, nothing less than that,” said the Court.The Court hearing the lawyer’s appeal against the observations made by a single-judge who had earlier dismissed his petition. The division bench said it was in complete agreement with the single-judge and that the petition was absolutely misconceived. “This man needs a course correction. What the learned single judge has said, it is absolutely correct. The petition should have never been filed,” Justice Manmohan remarked. .The single-judge, while dismissing the lawyer’s petition, had observed that it was backed by the tobacco industry lobby to prevent the government from creating awareness against tobacco.While warning the advocate against filing frivolous petitions in future, Justice Subramonium Prasad had also opined the petition deserved to be dismissed with exemplary costs. “But looking at the Petitioner, who is a young Advocate having a bright future ahead, this Court restrains itself from making any comments on the Petitioner which might have a bearing on his future,” the Court had said..Today, the division bench also said the petition was to help the tobacco industry. However, the counsel representing the appellant (advocate) said that was not the case. “Let’s attribute some IQ to everyone. Let’s not be under the misconception that the other person doesn’t understand anything,” the Court said in response.The Court added that the matter calls for use of a “firm hand” as it was misuse of public interest litigation by a lawyer.While addressing the appellant directly, the Court said: “Please have a course correction. Too early in the day to start like this.”The Court also remarked that the cancer was spreading and if people are not made aware of how cancer is spreading, then the younger generation will not know about it. “And what they are showing is actual reality,” Justice Manmohan said. After the counsel representing the appellant said he will file an affidavit of regret for filing the petition, the Court listed the matter for further consideration on December 7.