Background: Oral cancer is the third most common cancer in India which is attributed to the high tobacco burden especially due to a myriad of smokeless tobacco (SLT) products available in the market. Gul/Gul manjan is a commercially-produced, tobacco-based dentifrice, indigenous to rural India and Bangladesh, and mainly used by women. It is both highly addictive and carcinogenic; yet its prevalence, reasons for use and association with oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) and oral cancer are scarcely documented in literature, making this study the first of its kind. Aim: To determine the prevalence of Gul use, its predictors and resultant OPMDs and oral cancer in such consumers. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among 3452 individuals visiting the Institute's Oral Health Promotion Clinic between December 2016-March 2018. Their basic demographic details, tobacco use history and abnormalities found on oral examination, were documented in the clinical record form. Data pertaining to Gul users was subjected to further statistical analysis. Results: Of the total individuals screened, 2.9% (n=101, P < 0.001) consumed Gul (89.1% current and 10.9% former users), with majority female consumers (86.1%) from peri-urban Noida. It was used (up to 5 times daily) mainly to alleviate dental pain due to caries/endodontic lesions, which were present in 35.6% users ( P = 0.004). A statistically significant positive association was seen between Gul use and development of OPMDs ( P < 0.001) and oral cancer ( P = 0.001), with 7.9% (n=10; 70% Gul alone users) of the overall leukoplakias/preleukoplakias (n=127), and 7.1% (n=1, Gul alone user) of all the oral cancer cases (n=14), found in Gul users. The duration of Gul use ranged up to 25 years, indicating its high dependency. Conclusion: Gul use is relatively uncommon than other SLT products in India, even among males (the major group of tobacco consumers). Apart from teeth cleaning, Gul is a cheap, easily accessible antidote for acute dental pain relief (owing to nicotine-induced analgesia) among rural women who apply it multiple times daily onto the affected teeth and adjacent gum/mucosa, often leading to its dependency. Courtesy its significant carcinogenic potential which has been clearly reported here (OPMDs and oral cancer development among users), combating/preventing its production, easy availability (in spite of the complete ban on tobacco use in dentifrices) and consumption, is essential. Therefore, the public health challenge of prevention of the use of this form of SLT ie tobacco-based dentifrices, warrants greater interest and action than that has been received thus far, which in turn would contribute to the overall mission of oral cancer prevention.