The Supreme Court has called upon Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved’s managing director, Acharya Balkrishna, to personally appear before it on April 2. This request stems from purported violations of court directives that prohibit advertisements claiming to cure diseases and undermining modern medicine, according to a report from Hindustan Times.
A bench, led by Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, expressed disappointment over the failure to comply with its previous order issued on February 27, which had demanded a response from Patanjali and its MD. The court observed that the advertisements featuring Ramdev’s image, issued by Patanjali, directly contradicted the company’s earlier commitment to refrain from such promotions.
Having reviewed the advertisements circulated by Patanjali, despite the undertaking provided to this court, and noting the appearance of these advertisements featuring Acharya Ramdev, it is deemed necessary to inquire why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him under the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975. He has also contravened the provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.”
This Act, under Section 3, prohibits advertisements claiming the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of lifestyle diseases such as blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, asthma, cervical spondylitis, obesity, and heart diseases.
The court’s decision came in response to a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA), which raised concerns against Patanjali, accusing it of making false and misleading claims regarding disease cures while discrediting modern medicine.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, argued before the court, stating, “Violation of the law does not amount to contempt. Many things happen every day. The last order was issued on February 27. What actions have I taken between that day and today? Even if the court believes there have been further transgressions, I will communicate with my client regarding the appropriate response,” as quoted by Hindustan Times.
However, the bench responded, emphasizing that the provisions of the 1954 Act apply to all individuals. It also noted previous instances where Baba Ramdev allegedly held a press conference after the court’s order. The court clarified that the matter was not personal and that they had only issued a show-cause notice. They also made it clear that they were involving Baba Ramdev as a party and awaited his response.
Furthermore, the court criticized the Centre for submitting its affidavit late on Monday and warned that if their response was deemed unsatisfactory, necessary actions would be taken on the next scheduled date.
