The Supreme Court’s response to a plea by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) has led to action against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd for its misleading advertisements on the efficacy of its products and issued contempt notices to the company and its director Acharya Balakrishna for violating an earlier undertaking given in November on Tuesday.
Court’s Directive and Contempt Notices to Patanjali
Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah issued contempt notices to Patanjali and its director, Acharya Balakrishna, for violating a previous undertaking given in November. The court restrained Patanjali from advertising products addressing specific ailments.
Indian Medical Association (IMA), which first approached it in 2022, seeking action against Patanjali for disparaging modern medicine and making misleading claims about curing diseases, contrary to law.
“You are a person who can do anything. That’s what we get from looking at these advertisements. The fact remains that you are selling your product to people as a ‘permanent relief’. This itself is misleading and a violation of the law,” the bench remarked.
The court rebuked Patanjali for disregarding its orders and criticized the Union government for inaction. The bench highlighted Patanjali’s misleading claims and the detrimental impact on consumers.
Allegations and Contempt Proceedings
The IMA presented evidence of recent advertisements violating the earlier agreement, prompting the court to issue contempt notices. Patanjali’s claims of product superiority were found to be in direct violation of established laws.
In addition, the court received an anonymous complaint of January 15 attaching two press clippings of advertisements issued on January 7, where Patanjali claimed that its products are “more effective than chemical-based synthetic medicines of allopathy”.
Legal Proceedings and Accountability
The court directed Balakrishna to respond to the contempt notices and made it clear that actions against Patanjali would continue. Senior advocates representing IMA questioned the government’s silence on the matter.
“The respondent (Patanjali) is restrained from advertising products manufactured and marketed by it which are meant to address ailments specified as diseases/disorders in the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectional Advertisements) Act, 1954,” the court further directed.
Section 3 of this law prohibits any advertisement claiming diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of any lifestyle diseases such as blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, asthma, cervical spondylitis, obesity and heart diseases. Further, Patanjali’s claim to eradicate asthma was in direct contravention to the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules 1945, IMA’s petition said.
Government’s Response and Legal Consultations to Patanjali
The Centre, represented by Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, acknowledged the seriousness of misleading advertisements and assured prompt action. The court granted permission for consultations to address the issue effectively.
Ongoing Legal Battles and Past Controversies of Patanjali
Patanjali’s history of controversial claims, including false COVID-19 cure announcements by Ramdev, underscores the need for stringent legal action. The IMA’s pursuit of criminal cases against Ramdev and Patanjali reflects the ongoing legal battles to address false claims and misleading advertisements.
Comments 1