"Nicotine pouches expose a regulatory vacuum in India's tobacco control framework." Examine the adequacy of COTPA, 2003 and allied laws in addressing emerging nicotine products.

Nicotine pouches — tobacco-free sachets of nicotine, flavouring and plant fibre placed between the lip and gum [4] — have entered Indian cities without any dedicated governing law. India's tobacco-control architecture, built around tobacco-bearing products, is therefore only partially adequate to the challenge.

COTPA, 2003: coverage falls short

• COTPA regulates cigarettes and "other tobacco products"; pouches carry no tobacco extract and arguably fall outside its scope [4].
• Restrictions on freedom of trade (Art. 19(1)(g)) must be strictly construed, weakening any purposive extension of the definition to nicotine-only products [4].
• Consequence: no pouch-specific pictorial warnings, age-of-sale limits or advertising ban.

Allied laws: partial and contested

• The Prohibition of Electronic Cigarettes Act, 2019 bans production, sale, storage and advertisement of e-cigarettes, but is device-centred and does not reach sachets [1].
• The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and its 2011 regulations bar nicotine and tobacco as food ingredients — a plausible route, though pouches are not sold as food [1].
• Classification of nicotine as a "drug" under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act remains untested.

Enforcement vacuum

• The ICMR–National Institute of Cancer Prevention and Research found pouches spreading through e-commerce, hookah shops and gig-delivery services [4] — channels outside conventional tobacco inspection.
• Import and duty-free classification stays ambiguous absent a clear statutory category [4].

Global mirror

• WHO records retail sales crossing 23 billion units in 2024, up over 50%, with about 160 countries lacking specific regulation [2].
• Bright packaging, candy-like flavours and influencer campaigns deliberately target adolescents [3].

The vacuum reflects less a drafting failure than the lag between product innovation and statutory language. A definition-based amendment covering all nicotine-delivery products irrespective of tobacco content, backed by platform-level enforcement duties and WHO-FCTC-aligned marketing curbs, would close the gap — extending Article 47's mandate to improve public health to a generation the present statutes do not reach.