Misleading advertisement case: Supreme Court questions Center for not invoking drug and cosmetic rules against Patanjali

The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought an explanation from the Center for not invoking the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 against Patanjali Ayurved for airing misleading advertisements.

A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah said the Centre’s AYUSH ministry had sent a letter to all state governments in 2023 directing them not to take action under Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945.

The Court pointed out that the External Affairs Minister had argued in Parliament that the government had taken action against such advertisements, but now the Center says that Article 170 will not be implemented. When asked whether the government can suspend the exercise of law when it is in power, Justice Amanullah stated that in such cases it is a biased exercise of power and violation of the law. Meanwhile, Justice Kohli noted that it appears the authorities were busy looking at the revenue.

The court then ordered the Center to explain the letter to the Drugs Controller Authority, States, omitting Article 170. The court further decided to further examine the implementation of laws such as the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Drugs and Magic Remedies. Offensive Advertisements) Act.

The Supreme Court clarified that this investigation would not only be limited to enforcement of these laws against Patanjali Ayurved but would also include their implementation against misleading advertisements for other Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG).

Moreover, the court expressed its concern over such misleading advertisements fooling the public and affecting the health of infants and children and the elderly, who have consumed medicines after being influenced by the misleading advertisements.

During the hearing, the top court also asked Patanjali Ayurved whether the public apology they published in the newspaper on Monday was as great as their advertisements. On Monday, Patanjali Ayurved published advertisements in certain newspapers apologizing for the mistake in publishing advertisements and holding a press conference even after the lawyers filed a statement before the Supreme Court. This comes after Patanjali’s counsel assured the court that they would publicly apologize for their mistake. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of Patanjali, informed the bench about the advertisements.

Judge Kohli then asked whether the apology was as great as their advertisements? To this, the counsel said that the apology cost tens of lakhs and was published in 67 newspapers.

The hearing was adjourned to April 30 and the court asked Patanjali’s lawyers to produce the copy of the apology advertisements.