The Supreme Court of India has issued restrictions on Patanjali Ayurved concerning its advertising practices and discrediting of allopathy. These restrictions stem from a legal battle initiated by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali’s advertising campaigns.
Restrictions Imposed:
The Supreme Court has prohibited Patanjali Ayurved from denigrating allopathy in its advertisements and from promoting products claiming to provide permanent relief or cure chronic conditions.
Legal Basis:
The court invoked the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMR&OA) and its Rules to justify its decision. The Act regulates false medical advertisements in India, and advertising products for curing chronic conditions is a violation of its provisions.
Contempt Notice:
Patanjali and its Managing Director, Acharya Balkrishna, received a contempt notice from the Supreme Court for failing to comply with earlier directives issued in November the previous year.
Previous Instances:
The legal battle dates back to August 2022 when the IMA filed a petition against Patanjali for spreading misinformation about allopathy and exaggerating the efficacy of its products.
Past Violations:
Patanjali has a history of regulatory violations, including instances where its products were found to be of substandard quality and non-compliance with WHO manufacturing standards.
Role of Mr. Ramdev:
Despite being the brand ambassador, Mr. Ramdev’s position in the company might exempt him from legal scrutiny as he does not hold a legal stake in Patanjali Ayurved.
Legal Framework and Enforcement Challenges:
The existing legal framework, including the DMR&OA, faces challenges in enforcement, leading to repeated violations by companies like Patanjali.
Future Outlook:
The Supreme Court’s decision has temporarily banned all forms of advertising for Patanjali’s medicinal products, with the next hearing scheduled for March 19. This ruling is expected to compel regulatory bodies to take necessary actions.
Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ):
- What legal act did the Supreme Court invoke to restrain Patanjali Ayurved?
- A) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA)
- B) Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMR&OA)
- C) Patents Act, 1970
- D) Companies Act, 2013
- What action did Nepal’s drug regulator take against Patanjali’s Divya Pharmacy in December 2022?
- A) Issued a warning
- B) Blacklisted the pharmacy
- C) Conducted quality checks
- D) Provided certification
- Who among the following individuals might be exempt from legal scrutiny concerning Patanjali Ayurved’s practices?
- A) Acharya Balkrishna
- B) Vipin Sanghi
- C) Dr. K. V. Babu
- D) Mr. Ramdev
- Which legal framework regulates false medical advertisements in India?
- A) Patents Act, 1970
- B) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA)
- C) Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMR&OA)
- D) Companies Act, 2013