The Supreme Court has officially ended the contempt proceedings against yoga guru Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balakrishna. This decision came after they both promised to stop making misleading advertisements and false claims about Patanjali Ayurved products.
The court, however, made it very clear that if they break this promise, there will be serious consequences. The warning was given by a bench consisting of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, who had previously reserved their judgment on this matter on May 14.
The case began when the Indian Medical Association (IMA) filed a complaint. The IMA accused Patanjali of spreading false information that criticized the Covid vaccination drive and modern medicine. The IMA argued that these actions were harmful and misleading to the public, leading to the legal action against Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balakrishna.
SC Dismisses Contempt Case Against Ramdev and Patanjali
The Supreme Court has dismissed the contempt case against yoga guru Ramdev and Acharya Balakrishna after they pledged to cease issuing misleading advertisements and claims about Patanjali Ayurved Ltd products.
The case stemmed from a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association in 2022, which challenged Ramdev and Patanjali for making derogatory comments about modern medicine.
The petition argued that Patanjali’s ads, which claimed to offer miracle cures for various lifestyle disorders and illnesses, violated the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, and the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1954.
Despite a previous commitment by the company in November last year, the court issued contempt notices to Ramdev and Balakrishna after the ads continued to run in newspapers.
Also Read: Mamata Banerjee Issues CBI Ultimatum in Doctor’s Rape-Murder Case
Patanjali Misleading Ads Case
In November 2023, the Supreme Court reprimanded Patanjali, prompting the company to assure that it would stop running misleading advertisements. Despite this commitment, the court observed in February that these misleading ads continued to be broadcasted. As a result, the court issued contempt notices to Patanjali and its managing director, Balkrishna, highlighting the ongoing violation of its orders.
The court’s concerns didn’t end there. Since Patanjali and its leadership failed to respond to the contempt notice, the court took the matter seriously and demanded the personal appearances of both Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev. The situation escalated further as the court aimed to address the company’s disregard for its orders.
On April 16, both Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev appeared before the Supreme Court. They acknowledged the gravity of the situation and offered an unconditional apology for continuing to publish misleading advertisements and making derogatory remarks against allopathic medicines. Their apology was a significant step toward addressing the court’s concerns and attempting to rectify their previous actions.
However, the court was not fully satisfied with the way Patanjali handled the apology. The apology published by the company in newspapers was criticized for its language and the size of the text, which the court found inadequate and insincere. This led to further reprimand from the court, emphasizing that the company’s response did not meet the expected standards of sincerity and transparency.
In response to the court’s disapproval, Patanjali took corrective action by publishing another apology in newspapers. This time, they ensured that the names of Ramdev, the co-founder of Patanjali, and Acharya Balkrishna were prominently mentioned, aligning more closely with the court’s expectations.
This revised apology was a step towards addressing the court’s concerns and demonstrating a more genuine effort to comply with the legal directives.
Also Read: Maldivian Opposition Welcomes Muizzu’s Policy Shift on India
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q.1. What led to the contempt proceedings against Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balakrishna?
Ans. The Indian Medical Association filed a complaint against them for misleading ads and derogatory comments about modern medicine.
Q.2. What was the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the contempt case?
Ans. The Supreme Court dismissed the contempt case after Ramdev and Balakrishna promised to stop misleading advertisements.
Q.3. Why did the court issue contempt notices to Patanjali and its leaders?
Ans. Contempt notices were issued because misleading ads continued despite a previous court order to stop them.
Q.4. What were the criticisms of Patanjali’s initial apology?
Ans. The court criticized the language and size of the initial apology published by Patanjali, finding it inadequate and insincere.
Q.5. How did Patanjali address the court’s dissatisfaction with their apology?
Ans. Patanjali published a revised apology that included the names of Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna and aimed to better meet the court’s expectations.
