Thursday, November 21, 2024
HomeHome"Patanjali Not Alone": Supreme Court Slams FMCG Companies Deceiving Customers with False...

“Patanjali Not Alone”: Supreme Court Slams FMCG Companies Deceiving Customers with False Health Claims

Supreme Court Slams Patanjali and FMCGs for Deceptive Health Claims

The Supreme Court, while refusing to accept the apology affidavit furnished by Patanjali’s MD and co-founder in a misleading ads case, expressed grave concern about FMCG companies deceiving innocent consumers and jeopardizing public health.

Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah rebuked Patanjali during the hearing but extended their reservations to all FMCGs, stating,

“we are not concerned with only these contemnors before us, we are concerned with all those FMCGs and all those companies who are taking their consumers and clients up the garden path and showing them some very rosy pictures of what their product can do for them…and ending up with those people who are paying good money for it, suffering at the cost of their health. This is absolutely unacceptable”.

Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, representing Baba Ramdev, suggested that this opportunity could be used to frame broader guidelines for the larger consumer base and industry. However, attempts to have the court’s further orders tempered with mercy remained unfruitful. Addressing the aspect of public health,

Justice Kohli emphasized,

“These are major fault lines and the victim of these fault lines is not the profit of your companies, but the health of the public.” The case titled “INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA” featured counsels including Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Balbir Singh, Vipin Sanghi, and Dhruv Mehta, among others.

What’s the legal issue surrounding misleading ads linked to Ramdev’s Patanjali, and why has the Supreme Court criticized the yoga guru?

Supreme Court Slams Patanjali and FMCGs for Deceptive Health ClaimsThe Supreme Court, while refusing to accept the apology affidavit furnished by Patanjali's MD and co-founder in a misleading ads case, expressed grave concern about FMCG companies deceiving innocent consumers and jeopardizing public health.

The legal saga surrounding misleading advertisements involving Ramdev’s Patanjali, ignited by an August 2022 petition from the Indian Medical Association (IMA) to the Supreme Court, has unveiled a complex web of allegations, legal scrutiny, and judicial intervention. At the heart of the matter is Patanjali’s advertisement, which not only denigrated allopathy but also allegedly contributed to vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The petition spotlighted Ramdev’s contentious remarks disparaging allopathic medicine and linking COVID-19 fatalities to it, alongside accusations of Patanjali peddling unsubstantiated claims about curing diseases through its products.

During the inaugural court session on November 21, 2023, Justice Amanullah issued a stern warning to Patanjali against touting its products as “cures” for ailments, threatening severe penalties for non-compliance. In response, Patanjali committed to refraining from disseminating misleading statements regarding the medicinal efficacy of its offerings.

Navigating through a labyrinth of legal statutes, including the Drugs & Other Magical Remedies Act, 1954 (DOMA), and the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA), the court underscored penalties for propagating deceptive advertisements. Moreover, a memorandum inked between the Ministry of AYUSH and the Advertising Standards Council of India serves as a bulwark against deceitful promotional campaigns.

The case garnered renewed attention on January 15, 2024, following an anonymous tip-off to the court regarding persistent misleading advertisements. Promptly, the court issued a contempt notice to Patanjali and its Managing Director, Acharya Balakrishna, for flouting earlier directives.

Amid the legal imbroglio, Ramdev and Balakrishna extended apologies on April 9, 2024, for their alleged transgressions. However, the court remained unconvinced, deeming the apologies inadequate and suggesting a deliberate flouting of court orders. Criticizing the delayed submission of apologies and questioning their authenticity, the court refused to accept them.

In summation, the protracted legal skirmish centers on the IMA’s indictment of Patanjali’s deceptive advertising practices, prompting judicial scrutiny and rebuke. The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the gravity of the allegations and the imperative for adherence to legal and ethical standards in advertising practices.

Also read: Patanjali Contempt Case: Supreme Court Refuses Apology from Baba Ramdev, MD

Share your news, articles, deals, columns, or press releases with us! Click the link to submit and join our platform today.

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Today's Headlines