India defends electronic cigarette ban in court with attack on Juul

THE impending launch of Juul e-cigarettes in India was a factor in the government's decision to ban the sale of vaping products, a top government lawyer said on Tuesday (1) while defending the move in a Kolkata court.

Last month, India banned the sale and import of electronic cigarettes, warning of a vaping "epidemic" among young people and dashing plans of companies such as Juul Labs Inc and Philip Morris International to sell products in the country.

Juul had aimed to launch its e-cigarette in India in late 2019 and had hired several senior executives in recent months.

"What was impending was a nationwide launch of Juul ... it (the government) chose to act immediately," additional solicitor general Aman Lekhi told the court.

Lekhi made the remarks while defending two challenges against the ban that have been filed by e-cigarettes importer Plume Vapour and another company Woke Vapors.

He told the judge the cases were a "proxy for Juul" but did not elaborate. He later told Reuters inside the courtroom: "We feel they are a proxy for Juul, there's a very real possibility".

A Juul spokesman declined to comment on the government's remarks. Woke Vapors and Plume Vapour did not respond to requests for comment.

Two senior Juul executives were present inside the packed courtroom on Tuesday, seated for most of the two-hour hearing next to the federal health ministry's bureaucrat who oversees tobacco control, Vikas Sheel.

Juul Labs, in which tobacco giant Altria Group Inc owns a 35 per cent stake, is facing increased scrutiny in the US, its home market, as teen use of e-cigarettes surges.

Even before the ban was announced, the Indian government had said products such as Juul were harmful and could potentially undermine its tobacco control efforts. More than 900,000 people die each year in India due to tobacco-related illnesses.

However, India has 106 million adult smokers, second only to China, making it a lucrative potential market for companies selling both tobacco and vaping products.

Plume Vapour, one of the companies arguing against the ban, told the court on Tuesday that "relative harm" from e-cigarettes was less than from tobacco products and the government was scaring consumers by banning the product.

The government's counsel Lekhi said e-cigarette's novelty and attractiveness pose a public health danger, and the product needs to be nipped in the bud. "You don't want a new substance to cause addiction," he told the court.

The court on Tuesday did not put the ban order on hold, but as a temporary relief revoked the current requirement for sellers to submit their existing stock of e-cigarettes to authorities for disposal.

The cases, which have emerged as a key legal test of the government's ban order, will next be heard on November 14.

(Reuters)