Patanjali Misleading Ads: ‘Was Apology Same Size As Ads?’, Asks Supreme Court

SC has directed Patanjali that the apologies be collated and filed before the bench in two days.

(Photo: FIT)

“We are not looking at the respondents alone. Now we are looking at all. We are looking at children, babies, women. No one can be taken for a ride and the union must wake up to this.”

The Supreme Court, hearing the Patanjali misleading advertisements case, on Tuesday, 23 April, said that it is expanding the scope of the case – making all the states and union territories, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and state licensing authorities parties to the case.

The top court also asked senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, who was appearing for Patanjali founders Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, why the apology was issued in newspapers only on Monday and whether it was the same size as the previous advertisements published by the company.

Patanjali’s apology, published on 22 and 23 April in newspapers, said,

"We sincerely apologize for the mistake of publishing advertisements and holding a press conference even after our advocates made a statement in the apex court. We are committed to not let such a mistake be repeated ever in the future."

A cut-out of Patanjali's apology in newspapers.

(Photo: X/ formerly Twitter)

What the Supreme Court Said

The supreme court has directed Patanjali that the apology published by it in newspapers be collated and filed before the bench in two days.

The court noted that the implementation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act needs “closer examination” since other FMCG companies have also been publishing misleading ads and “taking the public for a ride in particular affecting health of babies and children, elderly, who have been consuming medicines after the misleading ads.”

The bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah also questioned why the Centre’s Ayush Ministry had in 2023 asked the states to not take any action under Rule 170 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945, and was now saying that the rule will “not be given effect to.”

It went on to direct the Union Ministries, that it has now made party to the case, to submit affidavits on actions taken by them against misleading ads in the last three years. 

SC Pulls Up IMA

The apex court, pulling up the Indian Medical Association, who is the petitioner in the case, said,

“The petitioner needs to put its own house in order regarding alleged unethical acts of the petitioner organisation where medicines are prescribed which are expensive and unnecessary. Your doctors are also endorsing medicines in the allopathic field. If that's happening, why should we not turn the beam at you?”

The Case So Far

In the last hearing, on 16 April, the court had given Patanjali a week’s time to tender a public apology for “violating their undertaking to the court and continuing to publish misleading advertisements.”

Prior to this, the court had already refused to accept two affidavits filed by the company in apology saying that it was “mere lip service.”

The Court had also pulled up the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authorities for failing to take action against Patanjali despite the firm violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act (1954) and the SC’s order.

Several complaints have been filed against Patanjali Ayurved Limited over the last two years for repeatedly printing misleading claims and advertisements to promote their products.

On 21 November 2023, the top court had warned Patanjali that it would impose heavy fines against any such false ads. However, after it continued doing so, the court took up the matter again this year.

The court will now hear the matter on 30 April.