Abstract: This commentary is about the compliance and implementation of the tobacco control law in educational institutes or EIs in India. It further discusses a legal case where there was issue of accountability by an EI related to the compliance related to prohibition of tobacco vendors in proximity to the premises. Also discussed are various studies where there is a defiance to the implementation of the law, which sometimes simply includes placing a board prohibiting sale around the EI. The tobacco control law in India must be strengthened so that tobacco, which is a leading cause of preventable diseases, including cancer, can be controlled. Keywords: cigarettes, chewable tobacco, pan masala, COTPA Act 2003, New Delhi, Central Information Commission. To its credit, India passed the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 or COTPA Act 2003 for short 1. When the then health minister was speaking on this bill in the parliament, a seasoned politician opposed this by raising issues related to the livelihood of tobacco growers and small-scale shopkeepers selling it. Another parliamentarian further inappropriately stated that ‘when tobacco is chewed by a person, it protects the teeth, gums and all those things’ and also stated the commercial reasons why tobacco must continue to be grown and sold 2. These answers disregard the scientific evidence of the harm which may outdo any possible conjectural benefit. The justification of employment caused by tobacco cannot stand, as the same does not stand for other narcotic drugs 3. With an increasing projection for a rise in cancer cases, especially blamed on the use of tobacco products, India must strengthen and make stricter the tobacco control law 4,5. The same was noted by the parliamentary committee on cancer which put a major focus on tobacco control6. The COTPA Act was made in response to the 43rd World Health Assembly, where member states were urged to consider tobacco control strategies, with a focus on protecting children from voluntary exposure to tobacco use and discouraging the use of tobacco 7. With the age of tobacco initiation in Indians being reported from 8-15 years, this is all the more crucial 8. The COTPA Act considered the early age of initiation by Section 6 of the COTPA Act which dealt with educational institutions where young people spend a large part of their early life. The Section 6 of the COTPA Act 2003 is as follows: No person shall sell, offer for sale, or permit sale of, cigarette or any other tobacco product- (a) to any person who is under eighteen years of age, and (b) in an area within a radius of one hundred yards of any educational institution. This was well intentioned, but its implementation was aimed to be done by outsourcing it to schools and colleges themselves and decentralising the on-ground enforcement. The College/School/Headmaster/Principal or even a teacher is an authorised officer to impose and collect fine against the violation of Section 4 of the COTPA Act 2003, which deals with prohibition of smoking in all public places including educational institutions 1,9. Apart from this collection of fines, the schools and colleges were armed with two rather simple tasks. One, to put a board prohibiting sale of tobacco within tobacco 100 yards of the educational institution and second to put boards within its premises to prohibit people from using tobacco within the premises. But the law itself, along with the rules, may be unclear about one important condition, i.e. the prohibition of sale within 100 yards of the proximity of the educational institution. Despite the schools and colleges putting up a board to prohibit the sale of tobacco products within the 100 yards, the responsibility to ensure that there is no presence of tobacco vendors within this area was unclear, as this was the issue before the Central Information Commission (No. CIC/ADIMV/C/2023/131421 Order dated 24.10.2024) where a college in Delhi had, in response to a RTI query, transferred the questions of presence of vendors to the Delhi Police instead of providing an answer itself 10. In that matter, it was pleaded by the first author, the complainant in the matter, that the guidelines by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare clearly state that ‘The educational institution management should ensure that no tobacco products are sold inside the premises and in an area within 100 yards from the premises.11’ The Central Information Commission in a landmark decision stated that the ‘complaint raises significant issue of public interest particularly of a very vulnerable section of the society, i.e., schools and colleges’ and recommended that proactive measures should be taken by the college in this case. It is to be noted that in multiple studies, such as one in the administrative precincts of New Delhi, schools did not universally follow the signboard compliance of the COTPA Act 12. In another study, the Central Government-run institutions of national importance were checked for their compliance. National Institutes of Technology or NITs, Indian Institutes of Management or IIMs, and other such institutions in many cases denied the information regarding compliance to the COTPA Act 2003. Some of the institutions even went further and bothered to litigated the denial of information up to a second appeals before the Central Information Commission but did not arrange for information like instances of fines collected, presence of vendors or even whether boards have been installed or not 13. Similar was the case with central universities in another such study where there was a lack of compliance14. In the case of higher educational institutions in Delhi, the compliance was not universal 15. Studies, as quoted above, reported cases where something as simple as installation of boards prohibiting smoking or prohibition of sales around an educational institutions’ proximity (of 100 yards) were not installed. This raises doubts about the well-intentioned objective of the parliament to expect these educational institutions to enforce the tobacco control law. This is even after the institutions themselves were empowered to enforce offences and the collecting of fines. The COTPA Act, 2003 must truly be reinvigorated with strict accreditation barriers for educational institutions which do not comply with the law. Further, even after passage, the COTPA Act 2003 has mild punishments as currently the fine for smoking in public places and selling outside of educational institutions is only two hundred rupees (2-3 $). This unlikely serves as a deterrent to translate the intention of discouraging tobacco use. Steps like the amendment of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 which provides for stringent punishment for sale of tobacco products to minors is in the right direction, but its compliance needs to be evaluated and a focus must be on strengthening of the one single tobacco law, making it more comprehensive and stricter 16. Recent directions by the Delhi government for appointment of nodal officers, if not already done as per law, to oversee compliance of the COTPA Act 2003 in schools are welcome, but these will need continuous follow up 17. This is all the more important as India, with its large population, must concentrate on promoting prevention of cancers, about half of which can be prevented, by controlling risk factors, leading among which is smoking18. Declarations: The work received no external funding. Authors report no conflict of interests. The work is a review and does not involve any human participants, drugs, animals, or human tissue, and includes non-personal data available in the public domain and hence not under the purview of ethics clearance. RS, the first author, a citizen of India, was the appelant before the Central Information Commission in the matter referred in the text. The work has been submitted as preprint on Zenodo on 17th March 2025 (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.15049121) References: 1. Government of India. The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003.; 2003. Accessed February 14, 2023. https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A2003-34.pdf 2. Lok Sabha Debates (English Version) Twelfth Session (Thirteenth Lok Sabha). Lok Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi; 2003:358. Accessed June 19, 2023. https://eparlib.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/759727/1/lsd_13_12_30-04-2003.pdf 3. Risk Factors: Tobacco - NCI. April 29, 2015. Accessed March 15, 2025. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/tobacco 4. Sathishkumar K, Chaturvedi M, Das P, Stephen S, Mathur P. Cancer incidence estimates for 2022 & projection for 2025: Result from National Cancer Registry Programme, India. Indian J Med Res. 2022;156(4 & 5):598-607. doi:10.4103/ijmr.ijmr_1821_22 5. Ghai R. Cancer cases and deaths to sharply rise between 2022 and 2045 in India: ICMR study on BRICS countries. Down To Earth. October 14, 2024. Accessed March 15, 2025. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/health/cancer-cases-and-deaths-to-sharply-rise-between-2022-and-2045-in-india-icmr-study-on-brics-countries 6. Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare. One Hundred Thirty Nineth Report on Cancer Care Plan & Management: Prevention, Diagnosis, Research & Affordability of Cancer Treatment. Rajya Sabha Secretariat, Parliament of India; 2022. 7. Forty-Third World Health Assembly: Resolutions and Decisions Annexes. World Health Organisation; 1990:15. Accessed June 19, 2023. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/173422/WHA43_1990-REC-1_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y 8. Narain R, Sardana S, Gupta S, Sehgal A. Age at initiation & prevalence of tobacco use among school children in Noida, India: A cross-sectional questionnaire based survey. Indian J Med Res. 133:300-307. Accessed March 15, 2025. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3103155/pdf/IJMR-133-300.pdf 9. Government of India. The Prohibition of Smoking in Public Place Rules, 2008.; 2008. Accessed February 14, 2023. https://nhm.gov.in/cota/Notifications%20on%20Section%204%20of%20the%20Act%20Related%20to%20Prohibition%20of%20Smoking%20in%20Public%20Places/GSR-417-D%28E%29.pdf 10. MISHRA R. On RTI plea, info panel directs Delhi college to strengthen anti-tobacco measures. The New Indian Express. October 31, 2024. Accessed March 15, 2025. https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/delhi/2024/Oct/31/on-rti-plea-info-panel-directs-delhi-college-to-strengthen-anti-tobacco-measures 11. Guidelines for Tobacco Free Educational Institution. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India Accessed June 19, 2023. https://ntcp.mohfw.gov.in/assets/document/TEFI-Guidelines.pdf 12. Singh R. Signboards prohibiting tobacco sale within 100 yards of educational institutes: the appraisal of prohibition compliance and on-ground status of the anti-smoking law in New Delhi’s major administrative precinct. Cities Health. Published online May 31, 2023:1-10. doi:10.1080/23748834.2023.2215417 13. Singh R. Compliance with the Provisions Related to Higher Educational Institutes of Anti-Tobacco/Smoking Law by Institutes of National Importance in India. Health Policy; 2023. doi:10.1101/2023.02.13.23285898 14. Singh R. On-ground compliance of tobacco control law by Central Universities in India. Tob Prev Cessat. 2024;10(February):1-3. doi:10.18332/tpc/183682 15. Singh R. Decentralisation of the Compliance of Anti-tobacco Law in India: The Case of Higher Educational Institutions in New Delhi, India. Cureus. Published online July 1, 2023. doi:10.7759/cureus.41247 16. Government of India. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.; 2016. Accessed February 14, 2023. https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A2016-2_0.pdf 17. Delhi LG directs appointment of nodal officers to oversee compliance with tobacco-free guidelines in schools, colleges. ANI News. Accessed March 15, 2025. https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/delhi-lg-directs-appointment-of-nodal-officers-to-oversee-compliance-with-tobacco-free-guidelines-in-schools-colleges20241211195107/ 18. GBD 2019 Cancer Risk Factors Collaborators. The global burden of cancer attributable to risk factors, 2010-19: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Lond Engl. 2022;400(10352):563-591. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01438-6