Patanjali misleading ad case: Ramdev and Balkrishna issues apology today after SC’s direction

Yoga guru Ramdev and his assistant Balkrishna issued a public apology  in newspapers today for not complying the Supreme Court’s orders in the deceptive advertisement case against Patanjali Ayurved Limited. Yesterday saw Patanjali issue an apology as well, although the court had questioned if it was as significant as the deceptive advertisements for its medications. […]

Yog Guru Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna
by Nisha Srivastava - April 24, 2024, 11:12 am

Yoga guru Ramdev and his assistant Balkrishna issued a public apology  in newspapers today for not complying the Supreme Court’s orders in the deceptive advertisement case against Patanjali Ayurved Limited. Yesterday saw Patanjali issue an apology as well, although the court had questioned if it was as significant as the deceptive advertisements for its medications.

The new advertisement, covering one-fourth of a newspaper page, is titled “Unconditional Public Apology” and acknowledges the failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s directives. It expresses regret for holding a meeting/press conference on November 22, 2023, and apologizes for errors in published advertisements, pledging not to repeat such mistakes. The apology, signed by Patanjali Ayurved Limited, Acharya Balkrishna, and Swami Ramdev, emphasizes commitment to adhere to court orders and relevant laws.

Previously, a smaller advertisement without specific mention of Ramdev and Balkrishna was published. However, during the court proceedings, questions were raised about the visibility of the apology. Despite claims of wide circulation, the court insisted on examining the actual size of the advertisement.

The legal dispute originated from Patanjali’s claims during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding Coronil, described as the “first evidence-based medicine for COVID-19.” Subsequent misleading advertisements prompted the Indian Medical Association (IMA) to take legal action. The Supreme Court, having warned Patanjali against such claims, initiated contempt proceedings due to continued violations.

The court criticized the insincerity of previous apologies and demanded a genuine demonstration of remorse. The case underscores the importance of accountability in advertising practices and adherence to legal directives.