The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition that sought to prohibit private organizations from conducting bodybuilding competitions under the titles “Mr. India” and “Open Mr. South India,” stating that such usage is customary in the sport and does not violate existing legal provisions.
The petitioner, a bodybuilding association, approached the court seeking a direction to restrain government authorities (respondents 1 to 5) from permitting private organizations (respondents 6 to 8) from conducting bodybuilding events under names like “Mr. India” or “Open Mr. South India.” The competitions were scheduled to take place at Rock Beach, Puducherry, on May 3, 2025, and at Karaikal Beach on May 25, 2025.
The petitioner argued that using the titles “Mr. India” and “Open Mr. South India” amounts to an improper use of the country’s name, which is prohibited under Section 3 of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950.
Refuting this argument, the Court noted that such titles are traditionally used in bodybuilding to denote winners and are not meant to exploit the national name for commercial gain. Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that the term “Mr. India” in the context of bodybuilding is widely understood to refer to the champion of a fitness competition and not an appropriation of national identity or emblem.
The learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to an earlier interim order in W.P. No. 33576 of 2024. However, the Court clarified that the earlier order was passed with the consent of parties involved and does not apply to the present case.
Representing the government authorities, Mr. A.S. Vijayaragavan, Senior Panel Counsel, and the Additional Government Pleader submitted that the competitions are organized by private entities, and the state has no role in the matter.
Citing Section 3 of the 1950 Act, the Court reiterated that the law prohibits the use of certain names and emblems in trade or business without prior government permission. However, in this context, the Court found no such violation.
“The sport is conducted to encourage physical fitness among individuals. Such usage is common in the bodybuilding arena and does not imply the improper use of a national emblem or the country’s name,” the Court stated.
Finding no merit in the petition, the High Court dismissed the case along with the connected miscellaneous petition. No costs were imposed.
Explore more on these topics