Contempt Case on Patanjali: Netizens question intention of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah & Hima Kohli after the refused to accept apology (Image Source: Live Law)
On Wednesday (April 10), the Supreme Court dismissed the second apology affidavit submitted by Patanjali Ayurved and its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna in the contempt case concerning the dissemination of deceptive medical advertisements.
Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Hima Kohli, presiding over the bench, declined to accept the recent affidavit filed by Patanjali and its MD, which expressed an “unconditional and unqualified apology” for airing the advertisements in violation of a commitment made to the Court in November of the previous year. The Court also rejected an apology affidavit submitted by Patanjali co-founder Baba Ramdev, who is also involved in contempt proceedings.
Apology unaccepted
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, was informed by the bench that the affidavit appeared to be only “on paper” and cautioned that the individuals facing contempt allegations should be prepared to face punitive measures for breaching the commitment.
“Apology is on paper. Their back is against the wall. We decline to accept this, we consider it a deliberate violation of undertaking. Be ready for something next to rejection of affidavit,” Justice Kohli told Rohatgi.
When Rohatgi said, “people make mistakes”, Justice Kohli retorted, “Then they suffer. We don’t want to be so generous in this case.”
“Why should we not treat your apology with the same disdain as shown to court undertaking? We are not convinced. Now going to turn down this apology,” Justice Kohli further remarked.
The Supreme Court on April 10, pulled up the Uttrakhand government for not taking action against Patanjali Ayurved.
Ahsanuddin Amanullah schooled the State Licensing Authority and said, “We have strong objection to use of word ‘bonafide’ for officers. We are not going to take lightly. We will rip you apart.”
After Rohatgi asked that the matter be heard next week, the Court said,
“Why? With all your seniority…To say it is only them it is wrong. The message has to go to society at large. Not just about one FMCG, but a violation of the law. Look at your replies to State authority when they asked you to withdraw. You said the High Court said no coercive steps against us. We are making it a part of your conduct, larger picture is your conduct with the public at large…”
Justice Amanullah then said, “Mr Rohatgi has been brilliant, he knows when tempers are flared, ask for time.”
At the conclusion of the hearing, Rohatgi mentioned that the individuals in contempt were willing to issue a public apology. However, the court did not grant leniency.
A brief background of the case
It’s noteworthy that on April 2, the Supreme Court strongly criticised Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, its Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna, and its co-founder Baba Ramdev for publishing deceptive medical advertisements, which violated an undertaking given to the Court. Balkrishna and Ramdev appeared in person before the Court as directed.
To recap briefly, the contempt case arises out of a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against Patanjali’s advertisements attacking allopathy and making claims about curing certain diseases. On the top Court’s reprimand, Patanjali had assured last November that it would refrain from such advertisements.
On February 27, noting that the misleading advertisements continued, the Court had issued contempt notice to Patanjali and its MD. Further, it had restrained Patanjali from advertising or branding its products meant to address the diseases/disorders specified in the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954 in the meantime.
In March, considering that reply to the contempt notice was not filed, personal appearance of the Patanjali MD as well as Baba Ramdev, who featured in the press conferences and advertisements published after the undertaking, was sought.
Subsequently, the Patanjali MD filed an affidavit saying that the impugned advertisements were meant to contain only general statements but inadvertently included offending sentences. It was further stated that the advertisements were bona-fide and that Patanjali’s media personnel was not “cognizant” of the November order (where undertaking was given before the top Court).
The affidavit also contained an averment that the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act was in an “archaic state” as it was enacted at a time when scientific evidence regarding Ayurvedic medicines was lacking.
On the last date, both Baba Ramdev and MD Balkrishna were physically present in Court. While Baba Ramdev’s affidavit was not on record, the court expressed its reservations about MD Balkrishna’s affidavit, calling it “perfunctory” and “mere lip service”.
Biased action against “Sadhu”!
Notably, netizens call this action by the court biased and unjust. Here are some of the reactions:
Social media activist Mr Sinha wrote, “SC refused to accept apology from Baba Ramdev for a “misleading ad” & said you’ll have to face consequences. Ofcourse! If he was a Maulana or Missionary man, claiming to heal people with holy water, nobody would’ve bothered about it. His biggest mistake is that he has a Baba prefix before his name. Because if it was about an action against misleading ads, almost all brands are doing it without any consequences”
Writer and activist Rashmi Samant wrote, “Ah, the endless parade of misleading ads, featuring everything from Horlicks to Rasna to Dove. But oh, the milords have a singular craving to “rip apart” one Bharatiya Brand. Colonialism: institutionalized, entrenched, and thriving.”
Media outlet Hindu Post from their handle wrote, “Nothing short of jailing a sannyasi will satiate their brown-sahib Constitutional Morality. After all, how dare a saffron-clad, Ayurveda and Yoga-promoting, self-confident, Hindi-speaking sadhu dare to adopt legal tactics that are commonplace in our broken judicial system? How dare he think that an apology will suffice, when he refused to jump at the first crack of our whip? The right to delay, bully and manipulate the system is only reserved for other brown-sahibs and English-speaking Lutyens’ PLUS (people like us) such as Sibal, Dhavan, Bhushan, Seetalvad, US Big Tech execs, Corporate heads like Tata, Birla etc. These natives are getting too uppity, we tell you…time to teach them a lesson! Alas, if only this Constitutional authority and power was used against mass murderers and criminals like Mamata Banerjee – so many lives, families could have been saved”
Author Neeraj Atri wrote, “So, the honourable SC has a judge named Ahsan-ud-deen Amanullah. The two judge bench on which he sits has warned @yogrishiramdev Swami Ramdev that he will face action for “misleading” ads. The petition was filed by IMA when its president was promoting Christianty. Surprised??”
Journalist Anupam wrote on X, “Can a dark person become fair with ‘Fair and Handsome’ cream or can a normal person look like Hrithik Roshan? -Does consuming ‘Muscle Blaze’ tablets help in building muscles and making the muscles glow? Advertisements were given only by Baba Ramdev and Patanjali? And no one else gives? What is the reason that now even Colgate has started calling itself ‘Herbal’? What is the reason why allopathic companies are using Tulsi in cough syrup? If Yoga and Ayurveda are misleading then who gives guarantee?”
Leave a Comment