The Supreme Court has summoned yoga guru Baba Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved’s managing director Acharya Balkrishna to appear before it on April 2 over alleged violations of court orders, Hindustan Times reports.
A bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah expressed dissatisfaction with the non-compliance of its previous order issued on February 27, which had sought a response from Patanjali and its MD. The court observed that Patanjali’s advertisements featuring Ramdev’s face were in direct contradiction to the company’s past commitment to refrain from such advertisements.
The court seeks an explanation from Ramdev and Balkrishna on why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for violating its orders prohibiting advertisements claiming to cure diseases and discrediting modern medicine.
The order, as quoted by HT, stated, “Having gone through the advertisements issued by respondent Patanjali, in teeth of the undertaking given to this court and noticing the said advertisement by Acharya Ramdev, it is deemed appropriate to showcause why contempt proceedings not be initiated against him under the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975. He has also violated provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.”
Section 3 of this act prohibits any advertisement claiming diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of lifestyle diseases such as blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, asthma, cervical spondylitis, obesity, and heart diseases.
The order stemmed from a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali, alleging false and misleading claims of curing diseases and discrediting modern medicine.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, argued that violation of the law does not constitute contempt and assured to convey any further response from the client. However, the court emphasized that the provisions of the 1954 act apply to all individuals and underscored the need for compliance.
Furthermore, the court criticized the Centre for filing an affidavit late on Monday and warned of necessary actions if its response remained unsatisfactory.
