Supreme Court Orders Patanjali Hearing on April 23

16 Apr 2024 , 01:49 PM

The lawsuit concerning misleading ads by Patanjali Ayurved was postponed by the Supreme Court on April 16 to April 23. This decision was made after the court met with Ramdev, the promoter of the company, and Balakrishna, the MD, volunteered to apologise in public.

The judges have stated that they will consider whether or not to accept Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna’s apology, therefore the court has not yet determined whether to penalize them for disobeying its directives.

Senior attorney Mukul Rohatgi, who represented Ramdev and Balakrishna, informed the court that the two are prepared to provide an unqualified public apology in order to atone for their transgressions before the lawsuit could even start. Rohatgi further informed the court that they were prepared to carry out specific voluntary acts.

But before issuing any orders, the court chose to speak with Ramdev and Balakrishna. Justice Hima Kohli called them to order and informed Ramdev that although his contributions to yoga were commendable, his activities in publishing deceptive advertising were not. The court went on to request an explanation from them.

“We are prepared to offer an unconditional apologies for any wrongdoing on our part. What we did was not the right thing to do. On April 16, Ramdev addressed the Supreme Court. “We will make sure this doesn’t happen again.”

“Medicines you advertised should not have been publicized per law,” the court declared. Press conferences are incorrect. That was careless.” Ramdev did, however, constantly apologize to the court for these acts and asked that the contempt matter be dropped.

“I’m sure your large company has a legal department.” Did they fail to advise your PR department not to run these deceptive advertisements? We’ll consider whether or not to accept your apologies. You have a history of disobeying court orders and breaking your word,” the top court continued.

According to Ramdev, there was no desire to disparage any kind of medication.

“Why do you degrade alternative medical practices in order to advance your beliefs? It is possible to accomplish such things; you ought to have gathered scientific evidence. “No one has granted you the authority to disparage alternative medical treatments,” stated Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah of the Supreme Court bench.

Ramdev and Balakrishna both insisted that they were merely expressing regret to the court for their acts, not excusing them.

At the prior hearing on April 10, the court had taken a harsh stance against the two and refused to accept their apologies.

“We do not accept it (unconditional apology),” the two-judge bench declared, expressing a desire to avoid being “generous” in this situation. We refuse to. We view it as a willful, intentional breach of the agreement.

The Uttarakhand government, where Patanjali Ayurved is headquartered, was also criticized by the court for failing to take legal action against the company for breaking the law.”The license inspector said nothing, and the officer did not submit a report. The top court declared that the concerned officials were to be suspended immediately.

Concerning the “countless innocent people” who took Patanjali medications in the hopes of being cured, it questioned the state authorities.

The court expressed worry that fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) corporations may be giving consumers with health problems false hope.

It mandated that all of the officers who held district Unani and Ayurvedic officers positions in Haridwar, the company’s headquarters, between 2018 and the present provide responses detailing the activities they took.

On March 19, the court ordered Ramdev and Balkrishna to physically appear in order to address allegations of contempt brought against them for their continued dissemination of false advertising that made promises to permanently treat a number of ailments.

Patanjali and Balkrishna were sent with a contempt notice by the court one month prior for publishing product advertising that were against the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable advertising) Act, 1954 and its regulations.

The Indian Medical Association (IMA) filed a petition, and the orders were made in response.

For feedback and suggestions, write to us at [e-mail]