Patanjali misleading ads case: SC pulls up Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority for inaction

Delhi: The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, pulled up the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority for inaction in the case of the misleading advertisement involving Patanjali Ayurved.

Dissatisfaction over inaction by Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority

Expressing dissatisfaction over the explanation offered by the body, a bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed it appeared that the licensing authority was activated to take action only after the apex court's April 10 order.

"Be honest to the court if you want sympathy and compassion…" the bench observed.

The top court said its main concern is whether the licensing body took action in accordance with the law in the matter.

The bench has posted the matter for hearing on May 14.

While hearing the matter on April 10, the apex court came down heavily on the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority for inaction and said it was not going to take it lightly as the body appeared to have kept its "eyes shut deliberately.”

Suspension of Patanjali’s Divya Pharmacy products

The manufacturing licence of 10 Patanjali's Divya Pharmacy products has been suspended, according to an order issued by the Uttarakhand drug licensing authority.

The order was issued earlier this month taking cognisance of complaints about misleading advertisements of these products by the firm in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act and the Drugs and Cosmetic Act.

The firm did not provide the information sought from it regarding the products and the explanation offered by it in its defence was not satisfactory, the authority said in its order.

Divya Pharmacy products whose manufacturing licence has been suspended include Swasari Gold, Swasari Vati, Bronchom, Swasari Pravahi, Swasari Avaleha, Mukta Vati Extra Power, Lipidom, BP Grit, Madhugrit and Madhunashini Vati Extra Power, according to the order.

SC asks Patanjali to file the original apology copy

The Supreme Court has issued a directive demanding the original page of a newspaper containing a public apology from Patanjali. This demand comes after Patanjali's lawyers failed to submit the original copies of the apology as previously instructed by the court.

In response, Patanjali Ayurved informed the court that the task of filing the original pages was made challenging due to the extensive volume of apologies issued across 322 newspapers. 

Despite the setback, the Supreme Court acknowledged a positive shift in the management approach of Patanjali Ayurved. 

Furthermore, in a significant decision, the Supreme Court exempted Baba Ramdev, the yoga guru and co-founder of Patanjali Ayurved, from personally appearing for the next hearing related to the case of the misleading ad. 

The case revolves around allegations of Patanjali Ayurved disseminating misleading advertisements, prompting legal action.