What is Misleading Advertisements Case Involving Ramdev’s Patanjali? Why has SC Slammed Yoga Guru?

The petition mentioned the instances where Ramdev called allopathy a “stupid and bankrupt science”. (PTI File)

In a blow to yoga guru Ramdev and managing director of Patanjali Ayurved Balkrishna, the Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday refused to accept their affidavits tendering unconditional apologies over publishing “misleading” advertisements. The court said it was “not blind” and the apologies came only when it was “caught on the wrong foot”. The matter will be next heard on April 16.

The court also came down hard on the State Licensing Authority for its inaction on the issue and said it is not going to take it lightly. “We will rip you apart. Do you have the guts to do what you are doing? You are acting as a post office,” the bench said in an unusually stern reprimand.”

The court also criticised the Uttarakhand government for its failure to take action against Patanjali Ayurved for violating the law.

Here’s all you need to know about the case.

WHO FILED IT?

The Indian Medical Association (IMA) had filed a petition in the Supreme Court in August 2022 after Patanjali published an advertisement titled ‘Misconceptions Spread By Allopathy: Save Yourself And The Country From The Misconceptions Spread By Pharma And Medical Industry’ (see below).

The petition mentioned the instances where Ramdev called allopathy a “stupid and bankrupt science”, and made claims about allopathic medicine being responsible for Covid-19 deaths. The IMA also accused Patanjali of contributing to vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic. The IMA stated the “continuous, systematic, and unabated spread of misinformation” comes alongside Patanjali’s efforts to make false and unfounded claims about curing certain diseases through the use of Patanjali products.

THE FIRST HEARING

On November 21, 2023, during the first hearing on the petition, Justice Amanullah orally warned Patanjali against claiming their products can completely “cure” diseases, and threatened to impose a cost of Rs 1 crore on every product for which such a claim is made.

Senior Advocate Sajan Poovayya, representing Patanjali, said there “shall not be any violation of any law(s), especially relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it and, further, that no casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine will be released to the media in any form”, as per the order passed on November 21.

LEGALLY SPEAKING

Drugs & Other Magical Remedies Act, 1954 (DOMA): Publishing a misleading advertisement is punishable with up to six months imprisonment, and/or a fine for the first offence. On the second offence, the period of imprisonment can extend to one year.

Section 89 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA) states: “Any manufacturer or service provider who causes a false or misleading advertisement to be made which is prejudicial to the interest of consumers shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees; and for every subsequent offence, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to fifty lakh rupees.”

 

Exit mobile version