In India, it is quite common to find fake branded soft drinks, especially when sold in glass bottles. I wouldn't be too quick to put Pepsi at fault for this.
Especially since there was something wrong with both the bottles he purchased.
He started suffering from severe dyspepsia and headache, followed by insomnia, after drinking from one of the bottles. His condition worsened over a period of time and he had to seek medical treatment.
Meanwhile, Sharma, on inspecting the bottle from which he had drunk, found dirt and other contaminants inside it.
Even worse, Sharma was shocked to find a condom inside the other Pepsi bottle, which was still sealed.
What is the probability of that happening, if the drinks were genuine?
And I think this is bullshit -
Staunchly denying any negligence on its part, Pepsi maintained in court that the bottles may have contained spurious products illegally marketed under its brand name.
To this, the court held that the soft drink major had failed in its 'bounden duty' towards its customers by not taking any deterrent action against such unscrupulous persons who pass off spurious products as Pepsi's.
In a country the size of India, how on earth are they supposed to track people making fake drinks. If the court accepted that the drinks were spurious, shouldn't it be the considered the government's fault?