Patanjali misleading ad case: SC raps Baba Ramdev for disrespecting the court after yoga guru tenders apology
The court highlighted the violations by both Ramdev and Balakrishna under Sections 3 and 4 of the Drugs and Remedies Act, regarding misleading advertisements for medicines.
FollowIn a stern stance against Patanjali, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 2) stressed the necessity of adhering to court orders, highlighting that defiance is unacceptable. The court's remarks come in response to a plea by Patanjali seeking additional time to file a fresh affidavit in the misleading advertising case. The apex court highlighed the importance of respecting orders issued by courts across the country, emphasizing the need for logical conclusions in legal proceedings.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court directed its attention to Yog Guru Ramdev and the Managing Director of Patanjali, expressing dissatisfaction over the failure to submit the required affidavit in compliance with previous assurances.
Atishi claims BJP offered safe passage amid ED threats; AAP leader reveals pressure tactics (WATCH)
The top court also expressed its intention to initiate a perjury case against Ramdev and Balkrishna. The Court highlighted discrepancies, stating that although documents were purportedly attached with the affidavit, they were allegedly created later, indicating a clear case of perjury. While the Court emphasized that it is not closing the doors on them, it made it clear that such discrepancies have been noted.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has granted a final opportunity to Ramdev and Balkrishna to file fresh affidavits within a week.
The court stressed that the solemn undertakings made must be upheld, stressing on the importance of abiding by the commitments given to the court.
Meanwhile, Yog Guru Ramdev tendered an unconditional apology before the Supreme Court for the misleading advertisements of Patanjali's medicinal products. It was conveyed through his advocate that both Ramdev and Balkrishna sought to personally apologize, with a representative present in court for this purpose.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court had criticized Patanjali for breaching its commitments regarding product quality and the claimed medicinal properties of its items. In response to a previous notice, the court summoned Patanjali and Balkrishna, questioning the possibility of initiating contempt proceedings against them.
Despite holding a press conference following the court's previous order, Patanjali did not submit a response, prompting the court's displeasure. The court expressed its intention to summon the managing director for the next hearing due to the lack of a response.
Jail superintendent at Banda receives threatening call following Mukhtar Ansari's death
The court highlighted the violations by both Ramdev and Balakrishna under Sections 3 and 4 of the Drugs and Remedies Act, regarding misleading advertisements for medicines. Additionally, a contempt notice was issued to Ramdev, Patanjali's co-founder, demanding an explanation for contempt of court.
Earlier in February, the court had cautioned Patanjali against making any negative remarks about medical systems in the media and had expressed disappointment with the government's lack of action, criticizing them for inaction.
