‘Be Ready For Action’: Supreme Court Warns Ramdev and Patanjali MD in Misleading Ads Case

0
474

Yoga Guru Ramdev and the managing director of Patanjali Ayurved, Acharya Balkrishna, found themselves in hot water on Tuesday as they tendered an “unconditional apology” before the Supreme Court. This apology was in response to their failure to file proper compliance affidavits in a case related to misleading advertisements, with the court admonishing them for breaking “every barrier”.

The Supreme Court did not mince words, telling Ramdev and Balkrishna to “be ready for action”. It also expressed disapproval of Balkrishna’s statement calling the Drugs and Cosmetics (Magic Remedies) Act archaic. The court’s displeasure was evident when it rejected Patanjali’s apology tendered last month, stating, “We are not happy with your apology”.

A bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah emphasized that every court order in the country must be respected. They criticized the duo for their defiance, stating, “You have to abide by the undertaking given to the court, and you have broken every barrier”.

The court questioned why the Centre had turned a blind eye when Patanjali was claiming there were no remedies for Covid in allopathy. Senior advocate Balbir Singh, representing Ramdev, urged the court to consider Ramdev’s presence and unconditional apology. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta expressed regret over the incident, stating, “What has happened should not have happened”.

Justice Kohli reminded Balkrishna’s counsel that they should have ensured the filing of the compliance affidavits as per their undertakings. The bench granted a final opportunity to Ramdev and Balkrishna to file their affidavits within one week. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on April 10, with the directive that both of them must be present before the court on that date.

The apex court had directed Ramdev and Balkrishna to appear before it on March 19 after taking exception to Patanjali’s failure to respond to a notice issued in the case regarding the advertisements of the firm’s products and their medicinal efficacy.

Advertisement!
Google search engine

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here