Patanjali Misleading Ads Case: Supreme Court Slams Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority For Being In A Limbo
The court pointed out that if there had been no action in previous years, the affidavit should have honestly stated that the matter was stagnant and no action was taken.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday criticised the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority's lack of progress on enforcing the law pertaining to misleading advertisements for drugs and medicines before its orders on April 10.
The court pointed out that if there had been no action in previous years, the licensing authority's affidavit should have honestly stated that the matter was stagnant and no action was taken. It questioned the honesty of claiming vigilance in the affidavit filed by the State Licensing Authority.
"We want honesty", the court said.
Observing that the authority has done all that needed to be done within the past few days, the court said that the licensing authority has suddenly understood its responsibilities.
"The long and short of it is that when you want to move, you move at the speed of lightning. You should have taken all these actions much earlier. Not after this court issued an order," Justice Hima Kohli said during the hearing.
The apex court also sought clarification from an officer at the licensing authority regarding the action taken in the backdrop of complaints received from the Prime Minister's office and the central government regarding on-site inspections.
Unsatisfied with the officer's response, the court allowed him to file an additional affidavit explaining his actions.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi informed the court that a public apology has been filed in various newspapers and the size of these apologies is also in tune with the court's expectations.
Taking note, the court said that there has been a marked improvement in Patanjali's attitude. "Earlier the ad was on a classified page in the corner and only Patanjali's name was written on the ads. Now all the names have come and the size is also bigger", the court said.
It is noteworthy to mention that Rohatgi pointed out that Indian Medical Association's president has given an interview saying that the top court is unnecessarily pointing fingers at IMA and that he wants file a complaint regarding this as this in direct confrontation with an ongoing hearing of the court.
As a result, the court has directed that the needful be done within two days.
The case has now been adjourned for another week and will come up for a hearing on May 7.
The Story So Far
The case began in November last year, when the apex court issued a stern warning to Ramdev and his multinational conglomerate for downplaying the effects of modern medicine.
Some of Patanjali's commercials tout how its medicines can cure a number of illnesses, while simultaneously disparaging allopathic and modern medicine.
The court had said that it would issue a hefty penalty for all those misleading advertisements that promise to cure diseases such as asthma, obesity, and the like.
At the time, Patanjali told the court that it would make sure that going forward, no casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy against any system of medicine would be released to the media in any form.
However, a day after the court's stern remarks, Patanjali came out with a media statement saying that it was not making any "false advertisements or propaganda" regarding its products and that it would not object if the top court were to impose a fine or "even give us a death sentence" if found making misleading claims.
This prompted the apex court to come down on Acharya Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev with all guns blazing and reprimanded the duo for openly flouting court orders.
However, during the hearing which took place on April 10, the top court's primary target was the Uttarakhand state licensing authority as the court criticised it for its inertia over the past five years.
"They've (Patanjali) violated undertakings made to the court, they've violated their affidavits. You are the execution authority. What did you do? Sit and wiggle your thumbs? Or did you wait for us to push you?" the court questioned.
Consequently, the court had directed the state licensing authority and the state AYUSH officers to furnish explanations regarding the actions taken by them to to enforce the law.
