On April 23, during the hearing of the Patanjali misleading ads case, the Supreme Court escalated its inquiries into deceptive advertisements, stressing the protection of vulnerable groups, including children, babies, and women. The court criticized the Union government for its lax oversight and called for immediate action to safeguard these vulnerable populations from misleading marketing practices.
The Supreme Court has expanded the scope of the ongoing case against Patanjali Ayurved, involving not only the company but also key government ministries, including the Ministries of Consumer Affairs and Information and Broadcasting, as co-respondents. State licensing authorities are also being added as parties to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the advertisement licensing and regulation framework across India.
The court also challenged the Indian Medical Association (IMA) for its own ethical practices, highlighting that while the association has accused Patanjali of misleading practices, there are similar issues within the allopathic community. The court questioned the ethics of doctors endorsing allopathic medicines, suggesting that the IMA should also introspect its role and practices in the healthcare sector.
At the preceding hearing on April 16, the court expressed its dissatisfaction with the apologies submitted by Ramdev and Balkrishna, co-founders of Patanjali Ayurved. The justices remarked that the apologies appeared coerced rather than sincere.
The case underscores severe potential consequences for health product advertisements that misleadingly claim disease cures without scientific substantiation. Patanjali has been accused of promoting products that claim to cure diseases like COVID-19 permanently without a scientific basis. They have also been accused of defaming modern medicine and the national COVID-19 vaccination, which is considered a violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.
