Patanjali offers unconditional apology after SC rap over misleading ads

The managing director of Patanjali Ayurved Limited, Acharya Balkrishna, filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court on Wednesday (March 20) offering an unconditional apology for his company’s misleading advertisements about the miraculous abilities of its products while questioning the effectiveness of modern medicine.

His apology came a day after a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah ordered him and Baba Ramdev to appear before it in person on April 2.

In a brief affidavit, Balkrishna apologised for the company’s ads containing the “offending sentences”, and said he has the highest regard for the rule of law. He extended an “unqualified apology” and said he would ensure that such advertisements were not issued in the future. He submitted that his company’s intention was only to “exhort the citizens of this country to lead a healthier life by consuming products of the ayurvedic company including products for lifestyle ailments through the use of age-old literature and materials supplementing and backed by ayurvedic research”.

Patanjali’s ads violation of 1954 Act

Patanjali’s claims about curing a host of illnesses like diabetes, asthma, blood pressure, and other lifestyle ailments is a violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. It is also a contempt of court because the Supreme Court on November 21, 2023 had restrained the company from issuing such advertisements and even obtained an undertaking from Patanjali to refrain from doing so.

The apex court’s order was in response to a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against misleading advertisements by Patanjali.

The union government was also named as a party in the petition. The court asked the centre to file a response indicating what action has been initiated against Patanjali for violating the Act. In its response, the centre said the state licensing authority of Uttarakhand is supposed to act on misleading advertisements by Patanjali.

Affidavit calls 1954 Act ‘archaic’

Balkrishna’s affidavit, while offering an unconditional apology, also calls the 1954 law “archaic”. It reads, “The respondent now possesses evidence-based scientific data with clinical research conducted in Ayurveda, which would demonstrate the advances made through scientific research in the context of diseases mentioned in the Schedule to the 1954 Act.”

The affidavit, however, did not elaborate on the nature of evidence or research the company has.