The consumer can demand a ban on the sale of goods injurious to health under the:

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 3:

The correct answer is the **Right to safety**. This right is considered the most fundamental and critical of all consumer rights, as it directly addresses the consumer's physical well-being. The Right to safety guarantees protection against the marketing of goods and services which are hazardous to life and property. When a consumer identifies a good—such as contaminated food, a poorly designed electrical appliance, or a defective vehicle—that is demonstrably injurious to health, their ability to demand its complete withdrawal or a ban on its sale for public protection is a direct exercise of this right. This is a preventive right, meaning it is intended to protect the consumer from harm *before* injury occurs. It places the burden of proof and proactive safety measures on manufacturers and sellers, mandating that products meet necessary safety and quality standards (often enforced through bodies like the BIS or AGMARK) to safeguard the populace.

The incorrect option is 1:

The **Right to information** ensures that the consumer is fully informed about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard, and price of goods or services. This right is vital for making rational purchasing decisions, allowing a consumer to compare products and choose wisely. However, the function of the Right to Information is to educate the consumer so they can *avoid* risky products or unfair trade practices. It does not, by itself, confer the power to enforce a public policy action like demanding a total **ban** on the sale of a harmful product. The ban is an executive or regulatory action based on a violation of safety standards, which is enforced via the Right to Safety, not merely a lack of information.

The incorrect option is 2:

The **Right to select**, also known as the Right to Choose, guarantees the consumer access to a variety of goods and services at competitive prices, wherever possible. Its main goal is to protect consumers from the manipulative practices of monopolistic producers and ensure fair market competition. This right is focused on the economic aspect of consumer welfare—the freedom to choose from alternatives—not the physical protection from inherent product danger. While a consumer might choose not to buy a harmful product, this right does not provide the legal basis for demanding that the product be universally removed from the market due to its threat to health. The demand for a sales ban transcends individual choice and moves into the realm of public health and safety.

The incorrect option is 4:

The **Right to compensation**, or Right to Redressal, is a reactive right that allows the consumer to seek justice and relief against unfair trade practices or exploitation. This right becomes operational *after* a consumer has suffered a loss, injury, or damage as a result of using a defective product or deficient service. For example, a consumer who falls ill after consuming adulterated food would use this right to seek monetary compensation or replacement of the product. Demanding a ban on the sale of injurious goods is a proactive measure to prevent future harm to others, which is fundamentally distinct from the compensation, which deals with remedy for past harm. Therefore, it is a post-injury right, while the core query refers to a pre-injury, preventive demand.