Patanjali misleading ad row: Uttarakhand Authority suspends licenses of 14 Patanjali, Divya Pharmacy products
The Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority disclosed in an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court on Monday (April 29) that manufacturing licenses for 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and its sister concern, Divya Pharmacy, were suspended on April 15.
FollowFollowing a stern rebuke from the Supreme Court, the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority has swiftly acted by suspending manufacturing licenses for 14 products associated with Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and its subsidiary, Divya Pharmacy. This action, effective immediately, was revealed in an affidavit presented to the Supreme Court on Monday, April 29th.
The suspended products include Swasari Gold, Swasari Vati, Bronchom, Swasari Pravahi, Swasari Avaleh, Mukta Vati Extra Power, Lipidom, Bp Grit, Madhugrit, Madhunashini Vati Extra Power, Livamrit Advance, Livogrit, Eyegrit Gold, and Patanjali Drishti Eye Drops.
Invoking Rule 159(1) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules 1954, the Authority exercised its discretion to suspend the licenses, a move prompted by the Supreme Court's reproach of the State Authority's inaction towards Patanjali and Divya Pharmacy's unlawful advertising practices.
The Authority disclosed the filing of a criminal complaint against Patanjali Ayurved, its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna, co-founder Baba Ramdev, and Divya Pharmacy under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954. Expressing remorse for any unintended lapses in compliance, the Authority tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" to the Supreme Court.
Both entities have been instructed to cease the manufacturing of the mentioned products immediately and to provide the original formulation sheets to the Deputy Director of the State Licensing Authority.
Prior to this, Ramdev and Balkrishna had offered the Supreme Court a "unconditional and unqualified apology." The apology pertained to the fabrications made by the corporation in its advertising regarding the therapeutic effectiveness of its medicines.
Last week, the Supreme Court reprimanded Ramdev and his aide Balkrishna, who were bombarded with questions about the prominence of the published unqualified apology in newspapers. "Is it the same size of advertisements that you normally issue in newspapers?" inquired a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah during questioning.
Following this, they published a fresh apology in leading newspapers for misleading advertisements of Patanjali's medicinal products. This time, the apology was bigger after the Supreme Court pulled up the duo for not "prominently" displaying it previously.
