Delhi High Court restrains Patanjali ad calling other chyawanprash brands ‘dhoka’

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has issued an interim order restraining Patanjali Ayurved from broadcasting its recent advertisement, which allegedly described all other chyawanprash brands as “dhoka” (fraud or deception), according to Bar and Bench.

Justice Tejas Karia directed social media platforms, broadcasters, and OTT services to block the advertisement within three days. The Court ordered the defendants to remove or disable the ad across all electronic, digital, print, and social media platforms.

The order follows Dabur India’s legal challenge, which accused Patanjali of disparaging the entire chyawanprash category and engaging in unfair competition. The commercial featured Baba Ramdev suggesting that “most people are being duped in the name of chyawanprash” and promoted Patanjali’s product as the only “original” Chyawanprash with the “true power of Ayurveda.” Dabur, which holds over 61% of the market, argued that the advertisement unfairly maligns its product and others in the category, potentially undermining consumer trust in Ayurveda-based supplements. The Court observed that the ad could create a strong impression on viewers that only Patanjali’s product is genuine, given Ramdev’s influence and public authority. It noted that the commercial’s tone and intent disparaged the entire chyawanprash category. The Bench added that even without naming Dabur specifically, the reference to other products as “dhoka” could impact the market leader. In explaining the ruling, the Court said that while comparative advertising is allowed, it cannot cross into disparagement. An advertiser may highlight superior qualities of its product, but the overall message must not be misleading. The Bench stressed that all factual claims in advertisements should be accurate and free from the potential to mislead consumers. The Court also clarified the constitutional context: freedom of speech does not extend to spreading falsehoods or denigrating competitors, and commercial speech is subject to reasonable restrictions to protect public interest.