In 2015, Union Minister Smriti Irani claimed to have found a camera pointing towards the trial room of a FabIndia outlet located in Candolim, Goa. Four people were booked in the case. Nevertheless, it is not the only controversy that revolves around the ethnic-wear chain, FabIndia. It flaunts being one of the top ethnic wear stores in India. With over 300+ outlets across the country and over-priced clothes and accessories, the store has made its way into the upper-middle and higher-income groups with its sparkling advertisements. In its 60-year long run, the company has found itself in more controversies in recent years than ever.
The 2015 hidden camera case
On April 3, 2015, Union Minister Smriti Irani spotted a CCTV camera positioned towards the changing room in a way that it could record illicit videos. Reports suggest that she immediately informed her husband about the camera and then called the local BJP legislator Micheal Lobo. He later filed a complaint at the local police station based on which FIR was registered against four Paresh Bhagat, Raju Payanche, Prashant Naik and Karim Lakhani.
The four were arrested and later granted bail by the court. They were booked under IPC sections 354C (voyeurism), 509 (intrusion into privacy) and IT Act’s section 66E (capturing, publishing image of the private area of any person without his/her consent). On April 12, it was reported that the Police had zeroed down to Bhagat as the main accused as he had the password for the DVR. Then Superintendent of Police (Crime Branch) Kartik Kashyap has told the media that Bhagat was caught changing the direction of the camera soon after the Minister had raised the alarm.
FabIndia issued a statement in which they apologized to the Minister for the incident but claimed there were no hidden cameras in the shopping area. They said, “The camera in question at Candolim-Goa store was a part of the surveillance system at the store and was installed in the shopping area. There were no hidden cameras anywhere in the store, including the trial rooms. These cameras are in full public view, and the fact that surveillance cameras are installed prominently displayed in all the stores.”
The case continued till 2017 when a charge sheet was filed against the four accused. Since then, no update has been available in the case. OpIndia tried to reach out to Micheal Lobo over the phone as he had filed the complaint. We could not connect to him. Once we have a word with him about the case, we will update the story.
Another case of ‘secret filming’ was caught in Kohlapur outlet
A similar incident was reported on March 31, 2015, where a salesman at Kohlapur outlet was arrested by the Police for secretly filming a female customer. 25-years-old Prakash Ananda Ispurle was arrested on April 1 after the complaint of a female customer. In her complaint, she alleged that when she was trying on clothes, Ispurle had placed his mobile phone in video recording mode in the gaps between the trial room door and the floor.
When she noticed the phone, she immediately raised the alarm, after which Ispurle pulled the phone out and deleted the videos. During the investigation, Police found that Ispurle was caught on CCTV filming the woman. He was arrested, and a case was filed against him under Section 354C of the IPC.
Illegal use of the word ‘Khadi’
In February 2018, the Khadi Commission or Khadi & Village Industries Commission, Govt. of India had sued FabIndia for using the Khadi brand without permission. KVIC had demanded Rs. 525 crores in damages from the ethnic wear retail outlet for illegally using the trademark Charkha and selling apparel under the khadi tag. When the company was first sued by KVIC, they said the claims made against them were baseless, and they would fight them in court.
In a statement FabIndia said, “We are in receipt of the notice from lawyers instructed by KVIC, and are surprised at its contents. We have made it clear to the KVIC through extensive correspondence and in multiple meetings over the last two years that Fabindia is not in violation of any of the provisions of the KVIC Act or regulations framed thereunder. The claims made in the notice are baseless. The notice has been entrusted to our lawyers, and any action taken in pursuance of the notice will be defended by us vigorously.”
However, later in the month of June, KVIC moved to the court, and things started to fall apart for FabIndia. In August 2018, FabIndia said it would not use the word Khadi or any trademark related to Khadi in any of its collections and would inform KVIC in advance if it would want to use it. As of now, the case is still pending in the Bombay High Court.
The feud between KVIC and FabIndia started in 2015 when KVIC sent a legal notice to the company warning against the use of Khadi trademarks. FabIndia replied that it had stopped the use of the word Khadi and its trademarks in the advertisements. However, in 2017, KVIC learned that FabIndia kept using the trademark and name despite the undertaking. A fresh legal notice was sent that further led to the court case.
It is noteworthy that the government body KVIC has acted against over 1000 private firms, including FabIndia, for misusing the brand name “Khadi” and taking unethical advantage of the brand’s goodwill.
The recent controversy of ad campaign ‘Jashn-e-Riwaaz’
Recently in October 2021, FabIndia launched a campaign to promote its Jashn-e-Riwaaz collection for the festival season that revolves around the Hindu festival Diwali. Interestingly, FabIndia did not use the word “Diwali” or “Deepavali” or mention the Hindu festival at all in the campaign. The trick to possibly secularize the Hindu festival did not go well with the netizen, and a fierce campaign was launched by Netizens collectively against the brand. Seeing the campaign backfiring, the company decided to drop the phrase ‘Jashn-e-Riwaaz’ and changed the collection’s name to ‘Jhilmil Si Diwali’.
About FabIndia
FabIndia was founded by John Bissell in 1960, an American businessman who also worked for Ford Foundation in New Delhi. It started as a company exporting home furnishing. The company expanded its roots to garments by the 1980s and further to non-textile range in 2000, personal care products in 2006 and jewellery in 2008. Currently, John’s son William Bissell is the chairman of the company.
