New Delhi: Expanding the scope of its hearing in the Patanjali Ayurveda case, the Supreme Court on Tuesday took a tough stand on misleading advertisements by FMC companies and asked three Union ministries to inform it about the steps taken to curb the practice. . "For public travel" and adversely affect their health.
The court passed the order after yoga guru Ramdev and his associate Balkrishna O Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd told a bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah that they have issued unqualified public apologies in at least 6 newspapers over misleading advertisements and Ready to release additional. The advertisements express their grief.
The bench said that the public apology published in newspapers is not on record and asked it to be filed within two days.It posted the matter for further consideration on April 30. Hearing the Patanjali case, the top court said that implementation of relevant provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Consumer Protection Act And the related rules also need to be examined closely.
It added that the issue is not limited to Patanjali alone, but extends to all fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies, which "are issuing misleading advertisements and cheating the public, especially Affecting the health of school going children and senior citizens." Citizens who are consuming the products on the basis of the said misrepresentation”.
“We must clarify that we are not here to gun for any particular party or any particular agency or any particular authority.This is a PIL, and in the larger interest of consumers, the public should know the path they are taking and why they are being misled, and how the authorities are acting to stop it, '' the bench said. The court asked the Union ministries of consumer affairs, information broadcasting and information technology to explain what action they have taken to prevent misuse of consumer laws.
It also sought clarification from the Center on the August 2023 letter written by the AYUSH Ministry to the licensing authorities and drug controllers of AYUSH of all states and union territories, asking them not to initiate any action under Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules I went. 1945.
The bench also asked the Indian Medical Association (IMA), the petitioner in the Patanjali ad case, to "get its house in order". It said that several complaints have been made about alleged unethical acts by the members of the IMA which resulted in sale of highly expensive medicines and other Prescribe treatment.The bench also ordered the National Medical Commission (NMC) to be made a respondent in the case to effectively assist the court.
At the outset, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna, managing director of Patanjal Ayurveda Ltd, told the bench that they had on Monday issued an unqualified apology for the "mistakes" committed by them.
"Where? Why wasn't it filed?" the bench asked. Rohatgi said that it was released in 67 newspapers across the country on Monday.
When the court asked the senior counsel as to why the respondents waited for an entire week before publishing a public apology, Rohatgi said, "its language has to be changed".
The court also questioned him about the size of the advertisements."Is this the same size advertisement that you usually issue in newspapers? It costs lakhs of rupees," Rohatgi asked.
The bench ordered that the published apology be placed on record and also said that I want to see the actual advertisement published in the newspapers.
"The said advertisement is not on record. It is submitted that the same has been collected and will be filed during the day along with copies in favor of the parties. Necessary action will be taken within two days along with copies in favor of the parties .,” it said. The lawyer said additional advertisements would be issued by Ramdev and Balkrishna to tender an unqualified apology for the mistakes committed on their part.
The bench said it is necessary to implead the three central ministries to examine the steps taken to prevent misuse of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act and Rules, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Consumer Protection Act.
It said these ministries will file affidavits regarding the action taken to prevent misuse of these laws since 2018 along with relevant data. The bench said the licensing authorities of all states and union territories will also be required to cooperate in the matter. -Will be included as a defendant.The bench told the IMA counsel that while they are pointing fingers at Patanjali, "the other four fingers are also being pointed at you (IMA)."
On April 16, the top court had warned Ramdev and Balakrishna against any attempt to "denigrate allopathy" and asked them to tender a "public apology" within a week in the contempt proceedings in the misleading advertising case against Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd. The apex court is hearing a petition filed by the IMA in 2022, alleging that the Covid vaccination drive and smear campaign against modern systems of medicine.
Ramdev and Balakrishna had earlier tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" before the top court for making tall claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products in advertisements released by the company.
The court passed the order after yoga guru Ramdev and his associate Balkrishna O Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd told a bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah that they have issued unqualified public apologies in at least 6 newspapers over misleading advertisements and Ready to release additional. The advertisements express their grief.
The bench said that the public apology published in newspapers is not on record and asked it to be filed within two days.It posted the matter for further consideration on April 30. Hearing the Patanjali case, the top court said that implementation of relevant provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Consumer Protection Act And the related rules also need to be examined closely.
It added that the issue is not limited to Patanjali alone, but extends to all fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies, which "are issuing misleading advertisements and cheating the public, especially Affecting the health of school going children and senior citizens." Citizens who are consuming the products on the basis of the said misrepresentation”.
“We must clarify that we are not here to gun for any particular party or any particular agency or any particular authority.This is a PIL, and in the larger interest of consumers, the public should know the path they are taking and why they are being misled, and how the authorities are acting to stop it, '' the bench said. The court asked the Union ministries of consumer affairs, information broadcasting and information technology to explain what action they have taken to prevent misuse of consumer laws.
It also sought clarification from the Center on the August 2023 letter written by the AYUSH Ministry to the licensing authorities and drug controllers of AYUSH of all states and union territories, asking them not to initiate any action under Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules I went. 1945.
The bench also asked the Indian Medical Association (IMA), the petitioner in the Patanjali ad case, to "get its house in order". It said that several complaints have been made about alleged unethical acts by the members of the IMA which resulted in sale of highly expensive medicines and other Prescribe treatment.The bench also ordered the National Medical Commission (NMC) to be made a respondent in the case to effectively assist the court.
At the outset, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna, managing director of Patanjal Ayurveda Ltd, told the bench that they had on Monday issued an unqualified apology for the "mistakes" committed by them.
"Where? Why wasn't it filed?" the bench asked. Rohatgi said that it was released in 67 newspapers across the country on Monday.
When the court asked the senior counsel as to why the respondents waited for an entire week before publishing a public apology, Rohatgi said, "its language has to be changed".
The court also questioned him about the size of the advertisements."Is this the same size advertisement that you usually issue in newspapers? It costs lakhs of rupees," Rohatgi asked.
The bench ordered that the published apology be placed on record and also said that I want to see the actual advertisement published in the newspapers.
"The said advertisement is not on record. It is submitted that the same has been collected and will be filed during the day along with copies in favor of the parties. Necessary action will be taken within two days along with copies in favor of the parties .,” it said. The lawyer said additional advertisements would be issued by Ramdev and Balkrishna to tender an unqualified apology for the mistakes committed on their part.
The bench said it is necessary to implead the three central ministries to examine the steps taken to prevent misuse of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act and Rules, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Consumer Protection Act.
It said these ministries will file affidavits regarding the action taken to prevent misuse of these laws since 2018 along with relevant data. The bench said the licensing authorities of all states and union territories will also be required to cooperate in the matter. -Will be included as a defendant.The bench told the IMA counsel that while they are pointing fingers at Patanjali, "the other four fingers are also being pointed at you (IMA)."
On April 16, the top court had warned Ramdev and Balakrishna against any attempt to "denigrate allopathy" and asked them to tender a "public apology" within a week in the contempt proceedings in the misleading advertising case against Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd. The apex court is hearing a petition filed by the IMA in 2022, alleging that the Covid vaccination drive and smear campaign against modern systems of medicine.
Ramdev and Balakrishna had earlier tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" before the top court for making tall claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products in advertisements released by the company.
