0
0
New Delhi, July 10, 2024 – Patanjali Ayurved has informed the Supreme Court of India that it has ceased the sale and advertisement of products whose manufacturing licenses were suspended by the Uttarakhand State Licencing Authority in April this year. The announcement came during a hearing led by a bench headed by Justice Hima Kohli, following a plea by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) which sought action against the company for violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.
This act specifically prohibits the advertisement of products claiming to treat certain diseases and disorders such as diabetes, heart diseases, high or low blood pressure, and obesity. The plea highlighted the ongoing presence of misleading advertisements, particularly on social media, despite the suspension of manufacturing licenses for 14 of Patanjali’s products.
Legal Actions and Court’s Response
In an affidavit filed in April, the Uttarakhand government confirmed it had granted permission to lodge a complaint against Ramdev’s Divya Pharmacy and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. for repeated breaches of the drug advertisement laws. The Supreme Court had previously rejected the “unconditional and unqualified apology” offered by Patanjali’s founders, Ramdev and Balkrishna, expressing strong disapproval of their violation of an earlier undertaking given to the court in November.
Compliance and Apologies
Patanjali had assured the court that it would refrain from making unverified claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products and from advertising them in contravention of legal standards. Additionally, they committed not to release statements against any medical system.
The Supreme Court also noted the apology from IMA President Dr. R.V. Asokan. This followed his remarks criticizing the apex court’s oral observations on the Patanjali case as “unfortunate,” which he later admitted were demoralizing for doctors. The IMA’s apology was published in their monthly magazine and on their official website.
Moving Forward
This case highlights the ongoing challenge of regulating health-related advertisements and ensuring compliance with laws designed to protect consumers from misleading claims. The actions taken by both the Uttarakhand government and the Supreme Court emphasize the importance of adhering to established medical advertising regulations and the legal repercussions for entities that violate them.
Conclusion
Patanjali’s decision to withdraw the contentious products and advertisements marks a significant step in addressing the legal and ethical issues raised by the IMA and enforced by the Supreme Court. It remains to be seen how the company will adjust its marketing strategies moving forward, but the court’s firm stance serves as a critical reminder of the importance of truthful advertising in the healthcare sector.
