The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 21) reprimanded the Patanjali Ayurved for continuing to publish misleading claims and advertisements against modern systems of medicine.
While considering a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against misleading advertisements, the bench comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra issued a stern warning to the company co-founded by Baba Ramdev.
“All such false and misleading advertisements of Patanjali Ayurved have to stop immediately. The Court will take any such infraction very seriously, and the Court will also consider imposing costs to the extent of Rs. 1 crores on every product regarding which a false claim is made that it can “cure” a particular disease,” Justice Amanullah orally said.
Following this, the counsel for Patanjali Ayurved assured that they will not publish any such advertisements in the future, and would also ensure that casual statements are not made by it in the Press. The undertaking was recorded by the Court in its order.
The bench observed during the hearing that it did not wish to make the issue an "Allopathy v. Ayurveda" debate but wanted to find a real solution to the problem of misleading medical advertisements.
Stating that it is examining the issue seriously, the bench told Additional Solicitor General of India KM Nataraj that the Union Government will have to find a viable solution to tackle the problem. The Government was asked to come up with suitable recommendations after consultations. The matter will be considered next on February 5, 2024.
Last year, while issuing notice on the IMA's petition, the Court had pulled up Baba Ramdev for making statements against modern medicine systems like Allopathy.
"What happened to Baba Ramdev? He can popularise his system, but why should he criticise other systems.We all respect him, he popularized yoga but he shouldn't criticize other systems. What is the guarantee that his system will work? He cannot refuse doctor system. He must exercise restraint in abusing other systems," the then Chief Justice of India NV Ramana had observed then.
The writ petition was filed by the IMA raising concerns over what they term as a "continuous, systematic, and unabated spread of misinformation" regarding allopathy and the modern system of medicine. The petition asserts that Patanjali's misleading advertisements disparage allopathy and make false claims about curing certain diseases.
The plea referred to a half-page advertisement published on July 10, 2022, titled "MISCONCEPTIONS SPREAD BY ALLOPATHY: SAVE YOURSELF AND THE COUNTRY FROM THE MISCONCEPTIONS SPREAD BY PHARMA AND MEDICAL INDUSTRY."
The IMA contends that while every commercial entity has the right to promote its products, the unverified claims made by Patanjali are in direct violation of laws such as the Drugs & Other Magic Remedies Act, 1954, and the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Additionally, the petition highlights previous instances where Swami Ramdev, associated with Patanjali, made controversial statements, including calling allopathy a "stupid and bankrupt science" and making unfounded claims about the deaths of people due to allopathic medicines during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The IMA further accuses Patanjali of spreading false rumors about COVID-19 vaccines and contributing to vaccine hesitancy. Swami Ramdev's alleged mockery and derision of citizens searching for oxygen cylinders during the second wave are also cited in the petition.
The petition emphasizes that despite the Ministry of AYUSH signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) for monitoring misleading advertisements of AYUSH drugs, Patanjali has continued its alleged disregard for the law, violating the mandate with impunity.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the pleas filed by the Delhi Police against the bail granted to three student activists in the 2020 North East Delhi riots case. A bench of Justices S K Kaul and A Amanullah passed the order ...
The Rajya Sabha has passed the Jammu and Kashmir The court underlined that Section 497 treats women as properties of their husbands and is hence manifestly discriminatory. It trashed the central government’s defense of Section 497 that it protects sanctity ...
The Supreme Court emphasized that where there is an absence of any specific rule or prescription, the last day for fulfilling eligibility is the last date of submission of the application. The Court made the observation while refusing the benefit ...
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) remains a cornerstone of data protection in the EU. Since its implementation in 2018, several updates have refined its application, addressing evolving data privacy concerns. For solicitors, understanding these changes is crucial for advising ...
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that not all marriages require a public declaration or solemnisation Not every valid marriage requires a public declaration or solemnisation in a particular manner, the Supreme Court held on Monday, as it underlined ...
New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday agreed to examine the plea of a 72-year-old woman, on whom a male co-passenger allegedly urinated on board an Air India flight in November last year, seeking a direction to the Centre, aviation regulator DGCA ...