Amazon Seller Services has been fined Rs 1 lakh by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) for misleading listings that marketed sweets as Shri Ram Mandir Ayodhya Prasad.
The CCPA found that the products did not have approval or authorisation from the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust. The authority said such listings might lead customers to believe that the sweets were genuine prasad from the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.
The case was started in January 2024. The complaint was filed by the Confederation of All India Traders against Amazon. The issue surfaced just before the consecration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya on January 22, 2024. Before the temple and its prasad had gathered much attention.
The CCPA has now ordered Amazon to pay the fine within 15 days.
Why did the CCPA fine Amazon?
The consumer authority found four products on Amazon under the name Shri Ram Mandir Ayodhya Prasad. The products were ghee laddoos, khoya laddoos, boondi laddoos and cow's milk peda.
The sweets were sold by Chandu Trading Company under the name Bihar Brothers. The CCPA said the products were commercially produced sweets and did not have permission from the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust to use the temple’s name in this way.
The authority said the name Shri Ram Mandir Ayodhya Prasad might give customers the impression that the products had a direct connection with the temple.
For devotees, prasad has religious significance. People who purchase a product named Ram Mandir prasad could reasonably believe that the food had been offered at the temple or had some official connection with the temple.
The CCPA also rejected Amazon’s argument that it was only an online marketplace and that the individual seller was responsible for the listings.
And that is why online marketplaces have the responsibility to make claims to consumers that could be misleading.
The CCPA issued a show cause notice to Amazon on 19 January 2024, just days before the Ram Mandir consecration ceremony. The authority reviewed product listings and the seller’s claims made before taking action against it.
The case was also important as the listings used religious references and imagery while selling commercial sweets.
CCPA Issues Wider Directions for Religious Products
The CCPA’s action covers more products than the four products involved in the original complaint.
Amazon is also advised not to allow sellers to use prasad, mahaprasad or bhog in relation to certain major religious institutions unless they have proper certification or permission from the relevant institution.
The directions cover a number of important religious sites like Ram Janmabhoomi, Tirupati Devasthanam, Mata Vaishno Devi and Jagannath Temple.
The move would affect how sellers market religious food products on e-commerce platforms.
Online shopping platforms have a lot of products and customers generally rely on product descriptions to understand what they are buying. If a seller uses the name of a famous temple or religious institution, customers may assume that the product is officially connected to that place.
The CCPA’s ruling sends a clear message to sellers. They should not use such names just to make ordinary commercial products look more genuine or special. The case also presents a question that online marketplaces will have to answer.
Amazon’s platform helps thousands of sellers reach customers across the country. Sellers are responsible for the products they sell, but marketplaces need systems to detect false claims and respond to complaints.
For consumers, this is a case in point of checking product information carefully before buying items that claim to be official temple prasad.
Customers should know about the seller, the source of the product as well as whether the religious institution that bought the product actually has authorised it.
The Rs. 1 lakh penalty will not be a huge financial burden for a company as big as Amazon. But the bigger implications of CCPA will be far more severe for sellers and online marketplaces.
It is a decision that religious names cannot be casually used to market commercial goods.
It also shows that consumer protection authorities can take action when product listings create a misleading impression, even though the platform itself did not manufacture the product.
The case could also mean Amazon and other online marketplaces will be more closely watched for listings that claim to be linked to the locations of major temples or religious institutions, too.
For sellers it is a warning not to make claims that they cannot prove.
And for consumers, the message is simple. A product that is referred to as temple prasad cannot be assumed to be genuine just because it is listed in the online market. Checking its source and official authorisation helps customers avoid being misled.
