NI Bureau
The Supreme Court rebuked Ramdev and Balakrishna over Patanjali’s deceptive advertisements, demanding their personal appearance in court. They were warned for not providing a satisfactory explanation for potential contempt of court proceedings. Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah expressed dismay at their failure to respond to earlier notices. The court questioned how they could disregard its orders and instructed them to submit their replies. Additionally, the court threatened to summon the managing director for the next hearing if responses were not provided promptly.
Previously, the court had imposed a temporary ban on Patanjali Ayurved’s advertisements and issued contempt notices to Ramdev and Balakrishna for misleading claims. The court criticized Patanjali for falsely asserting the efficacy of its medicines without empirical evidence. In February, the court had issued a show cause notice due to the dissemination of misleading advertisements despite previous commitments. It observed a prima facie violation of its orders and the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954.
Furthermore, the court criticized the government for failing to take action against Ramdev and his company. It expressed disappointment over the government’s inaction against Patanjali’s misleading advertisements, which were deemed to violate both the court’s orders and regulatory standards.
Aniket Sardhana
