The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its judgment in the contempt of court case filed against Patanjali Ayurved and its owners Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna over its misleading advertisements.
A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah also dispensed with the personal appearance of Ramdev and Balkrishna after it was contended that an affidavit would be filed detailing the steps taken to pull down existing misleading ads of Patanjali products.The affidavit has to be filed in three weeks. It will also contain steps taken to recall Patanjali products whose licences have been suspended.
The apex court was dealing with a case lodged by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali Ayurved over its misleading ads which disparaged modern medicine. Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna informed the court that Patanjali has written to all platforms which were still running its ads, and that the sale of banned products has stopped.
The counsel further requested that his clients be excused from personally appearing before the Court. Responding, the bench said that they will dispense with their presence and will be reserving orders. It asked the counsel to file their affidavit, adding that it will make a difference.
Reserving the verdict, the apex court said that the public is cognisant and if they have choices they make well informed choices. The court opined that Baba Ramdev has a lot of influence and asked him to use it in the right way. Subsequently, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Court that Ramdev has done a lot of good for yoga.
To this, Justice Kohli replied that what has been done for yoga is good, but Patanjali product is another matter. Initially, the Court’s focus in this case was on Patanjali’s misleading ads, the failure of regulatory authorities to act against Patanjali, and the corrective steps to be taken by Patanjali and its promoters.
Nonetheless, the Court’s attention was later drawn to several larger issues, including misleading advertisements by other consumer goods suppliers as well as unethical practices in modern medicine.
Last week, the bench had warned that social media influencers and celebrities would be held equally responsible and liable if they are found endorsing products or services in misleading advertisements.
It had also pulled up the Uttarakhand government for being hand-in-glove with errant licensing officers while failing to take action in this regard, after which apologies followed.