Akshay Kumar apologised for a pan masala ad — then appeared in another one

In April 2022, Bollywood actor Akshay Kumar faced intense backlash for endorsing Vimal Elaichi, a pan masala brand that uses surrogate advertising to market gutka and other tobacco products. The criticism sharpened when old videos circulated showing Kumar previously vowing never to promote such products. Shah Rukh Khan and Ajay Devgn, who appeared in the same campaign, faced similar criticism.

At midnight on 20 April 2022, Kumar posted an apology on Twitter: 'I am sorry. With all humility, I step back.' He promised to donate his entire endorsement fee to a worthy cause and to be 'extremely mindful' in future choices. He acknowledged the brand could keep airing the ads until his contract expired.

In October 2023, during a high-profile cricket broadcast, a new Vimal ad aired featuring Kumar again. The reappearance reignited the criticism and undermined the 2022 apology, which was now read as a contractual pause rather than a principled stand.

He apologized at midnight and donated the fee, but returned to the same ad eighteen months later, making the apology look like a pause, not a stand.

The endorsement contradicted the actor's own public statements, so the backlash was not about the product alone but about the gap between his words and his choices

The midnight apology's phrasing — 'the brand might continue airing the ads till the legal duration of the contract' — signalled a legal obligation, not a moral one

Surrogate advertising lets a tobacco brand buy mainstream media slots under a cardamom label, so the celebrity's face lends legitimacy to a product the label conceals

Returning to the same brand eighteen months after a public apology converted a reputational repair into evidence that the apology was transactional

An apology that names the contract but not the choice reads as a pause, not a position — and the audience will test it the moment the contract renews.

The Vimal controversy became part of a wider Indian debate about celebrity endorsement of tobacco-surrogate products. Several Indian states have called for bans on surrogate advertising. Kumar continued his film career without lasting commercial damage, but the episode is cited in Indian media ethics discussions as an example of how a well-worded apology cannot survive a contradictory action.