India’s Supreme Court rejects Patanjali's apology, cites false claims to avoid appearance

The Supreme Court of India has dismissed the second apology affidavit filed by Patanjali Ayurved and its Managing Director, Acharya Balkrishna, in connection with a contempt case related to misleading medical advertisements, LiveLaw reported.

The apex court, comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanudding Amanullah, declined to accept the apology, saying that it viewed the violation of the undertaking given to the court last November as deliberate.

Additionally, the apology from Patanjali co-founder Baba Ramdev, who is also facing contempt proceedings, was also rejected.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, presented the apology affidavit, but the bench deemed it insufficient, saying that it seemed merely "on paper."

Justice Kohli noted that the proposed contemnors should be prepared to face consequences for violating the undertaking, indicating potential penal action.

Despite Rohatgi's plea that mistakes happen, the court remained firm, expressing unwillingness to be lenient.

The court highlighted a peculiar attempt by Patanjali MD and Baba Ramdev to evade personal appearance by falsely claiming foreign travel.

The duo submitted applications seeking exemption on grounds of being abroad, supported by flight tickets.

However, the court noted that these tickets were dated a day after the affidavit was sworn, indicating an attempt to mislead the court.

This maneuver was deemed "most unacceptable" by the bench.

Moreover, the court reprimanded the State of Uttarakhand for its failure to take legal action against Patanjali and its subsidiary, Divya Pharmacy, over the misleading advertisements.

The bench questioned the state's inaction, suggesting involvement with Patanjali.

It directed officers of the State Licensing Authority to explain their inaction, saying that such negligence was unacceptable.

The contempt case originates from a petition by the Indian Medical Association against Patanjali's advertisements criticising allopathy and making unverified claims about curing diseases.

Despite assurances from Patanjali last November to refrain from such advertisements, they persisted.

Subsequently, contempt notices were issued, and in March, personal appearances of Patanjali MD and Baba Ramdev were ordered.

The court expressed dissatisfaction with previous affidavits, labelling them perfunctory.