A bench, headed by Justice Hima Kohli, was hearing a plea filed by the Indian Medical Association seeking action against Patanjali for violation of the Medicinal Products and Magical Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, which prohibits advertising of certain products for the treatment of specific diseases and disorders, including diabetes, heart disease, high or low blood pressure, and obesity.
Earlier, the top court had questioned senior advocate Balbir Singh, representing Patanjali, about the continued presence of misleading advertisements, particularly on social media platforms.
In an affidavit filed before the high court in April this year, the Uttarakhand government said it had granted permission to file a complaint against Ramdev's Divya Pharmacy and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. for repeated violations of the drug advertisement law and suspended manufacturing licenses for 14 of its products.
The Supreme Court had rejected the "unconditional and unconditional apology" tendered by Ramdev and Balkrishna and strongly opposed the violation of the undertaking given before the apex court in November last year.
Patanjali had earlier assured the high court that he would not make casual statements asserting the medicinal efficacy of his products nor would he advertise or brand them in violation of law and would not publish any statement against any system of medicine to the media in any form. .
The Supreme Court also took note of the apology issued by Indian Medical Association (IMA) president Dr R.V. Asokan in the IMA monthly magazine and on the official website for his statement terming the oral observations made by the apex court during the Patanjali misleading advertisements case against allopathy practitioners as "unfortunate" and a "very vague and general statement that has demoralized doctors.
Earlier, the top court had questioned senior advocate Balbir Singh, representing Patanjali, about the continued presence of misleading advertisements, particularly on social media platforms.
In an affidavit filed before the high court in April this year, the Uttarakhand government said it had granted permission to file a complaint against Ramdev's Divya Pharmacy and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. for repeated violations of the drug advertisement law and suspended manufacturing licenses for 14 of its products.
The Supreme Court had rejected the "unconditional and unconditional apology" tendered by Ramdev and Balkrishna and strongly opposed the violation of the undertaking given before the apex court in November last year.
Patanjali had earlier assured the high court that he would not make casual statements asserting the medicinal efficacy of his products nor would he advertise or brand them in violation of law and would not publish any statement against any system of medicine to the media in any form. .
The Supreme Court also took note of the apology issued by Indian Medical Association (IMA) president Dr R.V. Asokan in the IMA monthly magazine and on the official website for his statement terming the oral observations made by the apex court during the Patanjali misleading advertisements case against allopathy practitioners as "unfortunate" and a "very vague and general statement that has demoralized doctors.
