During the hearing, IMA president RV Asokan unconditionally apologised to the bench for his statements made against the apex court recently.
Published May 14, 2024 | 4:17 PM ⚊ Updated May 14, 2024 | 4:17 PM
The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 14 May, reserved its order on the contempt notice issued to yoga guru Ramdev, his aide Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd in the misleading advertisements case.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah noted that the counsel appearing for the firm has sought time to file an affidavit indicating the steps being taken to recall the advertisements of those products of Patanjali whose licences have been suspended.
The bench said the affidavit be filed within three weeks.
“Orders are reserved on the contempt notice issued to respondents 5 to 7 (Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, Balkrishna and Ramdev),” the bench said.
During the hearing, Indian Medical Association (IMA) president RV Asokan unconditionally apologised to the bench for his statements made against the apex court in a recent interview with the PTI where he answered questions about Patanjali Ayurved’s misleading advertisements case.
“You can’t sit on a couch giving an interview to the press and lampooning the court,” Justice Kohli told Asokan.
The bench told the IMA’s counsel that at this stage, the court was not inclined to accept the affidavit of apology tendered by the IMA president.
While hearing the matter on 7 May, the top court had termed as “very, very unacceptable” the statements made by Asokan.
The Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) had earlier told the apex court that manufacturing licenses of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy have been “suspended with immediate effect”.
The apex court is hearing a plea filed in 2022 by the IMA alleging a smear campaign by Patanjali against the Covid vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine.
The Supreme Court had also criticised the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority for its lack of action in the case involving misleading advertisements by Patanjali Ayurved Limited.
Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah expressed dissatisfaction with the explanations provided by the authorities, suggesting that they appeared to have attempted to evade responsibility.
The bench expressed disappointment with the affidavits submitted by district officers from Haridwar, including Ayurveda and Unani officers, and permitted the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority to file additional affidavits.
However, the Centre defended its decision to issue a letter directing states’ and UTs’ licensing authorities not to take action against misleading advertisements related to Ayurvedic and AYUSH products under Rule 170.
The court highlighted that the authority only took action following the Supreme Court’s order on 10 April, indicating that its inactivity seemed deliberate.
“This demonstrates that when you’re motivated to act, you do so swiftly, but if not, years can pass without progress. In three days, you’ve taken decisive action,” remarked the bench.
“What were you doing in the nine months since assuming responsibility? Finally, you recognise your power and duties. You’ve awoken from your slumber,” it added.
The court instructed Patanjali Ayurved’s representatives, including yoga guru Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, to provide original newspaper pages containing the company’s public apology. Despite the company offering e-copies, the court insisted on originals.
Furthermore, the court excused Ramdev and Balkrishna from personal appearances at the next hearing.
On 19 March, the apex court directed Ramdev and Balkrishna to appear before it after taking exception to the company’s failure to respond to the notice issued in the case relating to advertisements of the firm’s products and their medicinal efficacy.
The top court said it deemed it appropriate to issue a show cause notice to Ramdev as the advertisements issued by Patanjali, which were in the teeth of the undertaking given to the court on 21 November, 2023, reflected his endorsement.
The matter came up for hearing on Tuesday before a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah.
The bench told Balkrishna that they (Patanjali) were not so innocent that they didn’t know what the top court had said in its earlier orders in the case.
(With PTI inputs)
