Old Monk maker agrees to modify bottle labels after Bombay High Court questions 7-year age claims

The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to grant an immediate interim stay on a prohibition order issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) halting the sale of ‘Old Monk’ rum in Maharashtra. [Mohan Rocky Springwater Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & Ors.]

The regulatory dispute stems from FSSAI orders prohibiting the sale over labeling non-compliance and misleading aging allegations. The authority maintained that adding artificial flavoring substances to neutral spirits alters rum's natural characteristics.

A Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad took strong exception to packaging descriptors such as ‘7 years old blended’ and ‘very old vatted’.

The Court noted that such claims mislead ordinary consumers into believing that the entire spirit was aged for 7 years.

“You are misleading the public...7 years old means 7 years old!” ACJ Ghuge remarked.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, appearing for manufacturer Mohan Rocky Springwater, submitted that the label distinguishes blended spirits under statutory rules. 

“How we wish every citizen of this country was so educated to understand all this!” the Bench quipped.

ACJ Ghuge also scrutinised the fine print used to disclose added flavorings.

“I used my magnifying glass, I could not find it. I tried to look at it at every corner, I didn't find it,” the judge said as he examined the product box in court. 

Seervai argued that FSSAI regulations explicitly permit neutral spirits with approved flavoring additives. He emphasised that all ingredients are disclosed on the packaging and alleged that Old Monk was being selectively targeted while competitor brands use identical processes.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh countered that statutory rules require rum to derive its characteristic taste and aroma naturally from sugarcane fermentation.

He argued that if neutral spirits form the majority and rum spirit accounts for merely 2 to 5 percent, marketing the product as pure rum misleads consumers.

The Court refused interim relief against the sales ban. 

“Our prima facie view is that on some counts you are right and on some counts you are at fault. So in this situation we can't grant you a final relief," it said.

To break the impasse and resume sales in Maharashtra, the manufacturer agreed to modify its packaging. The company undertook to delete the ‘7 years old blended’ descriptor and prominently display ‘added flavor’ on its bottle labels.

The High Court directed the manufacturer to submit a fresh, digitally printed draft label for judicial review. 

The matter will be heard next on September 3.