Circulation of banned tobacco products remains unabated across Coimbatore district
The contraband substance was found when bags of students were checked at a school. Based on information, the grocery store was searched by the police, resulting in the seizure.
Following the incident, people from Karumathampatti raised concerns over efforts taken by the police and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) in curbing the sale of gutkha, especially near schools.
'Like Kerala lottery tickets, which are banned in Tamil Nadu, sale of gutkha continues unabated. The flow of such products through the migrant workforce also needs to be curbed. The police should initiate stringent action against the sellers, including detention under Goondas Act,' said S. Basha, organiser of Namma Mettupalayam Social Welfare Committee.
A government school teacher, who has worked in different parts of the district, claimed that use of banned tobacco products was rampant among students in higher secondary schools.
'On many occasions, teachers have informed the police after noticing usage of tobacco products that come in tiny bags, which are kept under lip or between lip and gum. Despite searches done in shops from time to time, there is no change in the situation. While most of the student users are said to be sourcing the products through their adult friends, some have been found stealing from their parents,' said the teacher on condition of anonymity.
A senior police officer from Coimbatore city said that awareness activities are being conducted for students at regular intervals through Anti-Drug Clubs that are functional in all schools. On the enforcement front, shops are raided along with Food Safety Officers (FSO).
Sources in the Food Safety Department said that routine work load and minimal staff strength had impacted joint drives with the police, which are conducted twice a month.
The FSSAI will seal a shop for 15 days and slap a fine of ₹25,000 upon finding it selling banned tobacco products for the first time. A second offence attracts sealing of the shop for one month and a fine of ₹50,000. A third offence results in sealing of the shop for three months along with a fine of ₹1 lakh and suspension of the food safety licence.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
7 hours ago
- The Hindu
For the first time in Tamil Nadu, economic offender detained under Goondas Act
In a first of its kind, an economic offender has been detained under Goondas Act in Tamil Nadu. Based on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police (South Zone), Economic Offences Wing, Virudhunagar Collector N. O. Sukhaputra, has ordered detention of one S. Gangadaran of Sankarankoil who had been arrested for having cheated 239 persons to the tune of ₹12 crore. A statement said that based on complaints received from several people regarding the cheating done by Gangadaran in the guise of giving them franchise for a chain of biriyani shops, the accused was arrested on July 7. The statement added that a Government Order dated July 8, 2025, permitted officials to detain accused involved economic offences under the Goondas Act. Based on the new G.O., the detention order was issued and was served to the accused on August 3 at Madurai Central Prison where he had been lodged.
The Hindu
8 hours ago
- The Hindu
365 litres of palm oil stocked in unhygienic, used cans seized from snacks-making unit in Aruppukottai
A team of officers from the Department of Food Safety seized 365 litres of palm oil that were stocked in used cans without seal and label from a snacks manufacturing unit at Aruppukottai on Wednesday. The team led by Virudhunagar district Food Safety Designated Officer Dr. S. Mariappan, found the palm oil, used for making snacks, that was packed in unhygienic cans. 'As per Food Safety Act, the cans should have been sealed and should also bear the label of the manufacturer or supplier,' he said. Besides, the officials found 11 kg of non-iodised salt on the premises and seized it. The operation of the unit has been suspended till the unit got FSSAI license. Based on the information given by the trader, the officials then inspected an oil shop in Aruppukottai market, and found 195 litres of palm oil that were kept in old and unhygienic cans. The officials have lifted samples of palm oil for analysis. Then the officials inspected a palm oil supplier at Fatima Nagar in Virudhunagar and found he had supplied palm oil in unsealed and unlabelled cans which were found at the snacks manufacturing unit and at the trader in Aruppukottai. The team also seized 327 used plastic cans and 3,099 used tins from the premises. Further action is underway. Dr. Mariappan said that all the traders of edible oil should have FSSAI license, manufacturers should sell the edible oil only in packed and labelled cans and used cans should not be used for refilling.
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Armstrong murder: Madras High Court quashes detention of 17 accused under Goondas Act
Wondering how Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police A. Arun could have scrutinised 14,000 pages of voluminous documents in a single day, the Madras High Court on Wednesday (August 6, 2025) quashed the preventive detention orders passed by him against 17 accused in the murder of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) Tamil Nadu unit president K. Armstrong. A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and V. Lakshminarayanan pointed out that the sponsoring authority (Assistant Commissioner of Police, Koyambedu Range) under the Goondas Act had submitted a proposal before the detaining authority (Commissioner of Police) on September 19, 2024, along with around 14,000 pages of supporting materials. The detaining authority had accepted the proposal and passed the detention orders on the same day. Allowing a batch of habeas corpus petitions filed against the detention orders, the judges agreed with the detainees' counsel that it would be humanly impossible for an indvidual to go through such voluminous documents in a single day and take a decision after applying his mind. 'The detaining authority appears to have scrutinised approximately 14,000 pages in one single day... which is an impossible task for any human being... In light of these observations, we are constrained to hold that the detaining authority had not applied his mind while passing the grounds of detention as well as the detention order,' the Division Bench wrote. Authoring the verdict, Justice Ramesh pointed out the object of preventive detention was not to punish a man for an offence committed by him but to intercept him before he commits an offence and to prevent him from causing disturbance to public order on the basis of his antecedents. Therefore, the detaining authorities must be highly circumspect before issuing the detention orders. 'Any indifferent attitude on the part of the detaining authority... would defeat the very purpose of the preventive detention and turn the detention order as a dead letter and frustrate the entire proceedings,' the judges highlighted. Effect on bail proceedings When Additional Advocate General P. Kumaresan feared that the quashing of the preventive detention orders could become an influencing factor for the grant of bail to the accused in the murder case, the judges made it clear that both were mutually exclusive and that in no case, the quashing of a preventive detention order could be considered as a factor to grant bail in a criminal case. 'We intend to remind the bail courts that the standard or grounds for consideration of bail application is distinct from that of the grounds of consideration adopted by the High Court in interfering with the preventive detention orders. While punitive detention is made after proper application of mind, preventive detention touches upon a subjective satisfaction of a detaining authority,' the Bench said. 'In light of these discussions, we make it unambiguously clear that the bail court, in such cases, shall not give weightage to quashing of the detention order, as a ground for the grant of bail. This observation shall hold good for the present case also,' the judges concluded.
