Supreme Court Reserves Verdict In Contempt Case Against Patanjali For Misleading Ads

Supreme Court Reserves Verdict In Contempt Case Against Patanjali For Misleading Ads

The Supreme Court reserved its verdict on Tuesday in the contempt of court case filed against Patanjali Ayurved and its owners, Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, regarding the company's misleading advertisements.

A bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah also waived the requirement for the personal appearance of Ramdev and Balkrishna. This decision came after it was conveyed that an affidavit would be submitted outlining the measures taken to remove existing misleading advertisements of Patanjali products.

The affidavit, mandated to be filed within three weeks, will also outline the actions taken to recall Patanjali products whose licenses have been suspended.

The Court was addressing a case brought forth by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali Ayurved concerning its misleading advertisements that disparaged modern medicine.

Presenting on behalf of Ramdev and Balkrishna today, Senior Advocate Balbir Singh informed the Court that Patanjali has communicated with all platforms still displaying its advertisements and ceased the sale of banned products.

In response, the bench granted Singh's request for his clients to be excused from personally appearing before the court.

"We will dispense with their presence; we will be reserving orders. File your affidavit; it will make a difference."

After reserving orders in the contempt matter, the Court concluded, 

"The public is cognisant, if they have choices, they make well-informed choices... Baba Ramdev has a lot of influence; use it in the right way."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta then emphasized Ramdev's significant contributions to yoga during the proceedings.

"What has been done for yoga is good, but Patanjali products are another matter," Justice Kohil replied.

Initially, the Court's attention in this case was directed towards Patanjali's misleading advertisements, which led to a temporary ban imposed by the Court. Additionally, the discussion centered on the regulatory authorities' failure to take action against Patanjali and the necessary corrective measures to be undertaken by Patanjali and its promoters, Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna.

However, the Court's focus shifted to encompass broader issues, including misleading advertisements by other consumer goods suppliers and unethical practices in modern medicine.

Last week, the Bench cautioned that social media influencers and celebrities would face equal responsibility and liability if they endorse products or services in misleading advertisements.

The Court expressed serious concern over the presence of Patanjali product advertisements, now prohibited, on certain online platforms. Additionally, it emphasized that the company should not be permitted to sell products for which licenses have been suspended.

Previously, the Court criticized the Uttarakhand government for its collusion with negligent licensing officers and its failure to address this issue, prompting apologies to follow.