Supreme Court reserves verdict in contempt of court case against Patanjali over misleading ads

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict in the contempt of court case filed against Patanjali Ayurved and its owners Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna over the company's misleading advertisements (Indian Medical Association and anr v. Union of India and ors).A Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah also dispensed with the personal appearance of Ramdev and Balkrishna after it was submitted that an affidavit would be filed detailing the steps taken to pull down existing misleading ads of Patanjali products. The affidavit, which is required to be filed in three weeks, will also contain steps taken to recall Patanjali products whose licences have been suspended..The Court was dealing with a case filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali Ayurved over its misleading ads which disparaged modern medicine..Appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna today, Senior Advocate Balbir Singh told the Court that Patanjali has written to all platforms which were still running its ads, and that the sale of banned products has stopped.Singh also requested that his clients be excused from personally appearing before the Court. The Bench said in response,"We will dispense with their presence...we will be reserving orders. File your affidavit, it will make a difference.".After reserving orders in the contempt matter, the Court said,"Public is cognisant, if they have choices they make well informed choices...Baba Ramdev has a lot of influence, use it in the right way."Solicitor General Tushar Mehta then told the Court that Ramdev has done a lot of good for yoga."What has been done for yoga is good, but Patanjali products is another matter," Justice Kohil replied..The Court's focus in this case was initially on Patanjali's misleading ads (which the Court later imposed a temporary ban on), the failure of regulatory authorities to act against Patanjali, and the corrective steps to be taken by Patanjali and its promoters (Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna).However, the Court's attention was later drawn to several larger issues, including misleading advertisements by other consumer goods suppliers as well as unethical practices in modern medicine..The Bench had last week warned that social media influencers and celebrities would be held equally responsible and liable if they are found endorsing products or services in misleading advertisements.It had taken critical note of the fact that such ads for Patanjali products, which have now been prohibited, were still available on certain online platforms. The Court also said that the company should not be allowed to sell products for which licences were suspended.It had earlier pulled up the Uttarakhand government for being hand-in-glove with errant licensing officers while failing to take action in this regard, after which apologies followed..Patanjali case: Supreme Court says IMA should also put its house in order; address unethical practices in modern medicine