The Supreme Court has scheduled April 23 for the next hearing in the case involving Yoga guru Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd MD Balkrishna Acharya over alleged contempt related to misleading advertisements. This decision came after their lawyers offered to issue a public apology during a recent hearing.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Ramdev and Balkrishna, expressed their willingness to issue a public apology before a bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah.
During the hearing, the bench urged Ramdev and Balkrishna to engage with the court, emphasizing the importance of establishing a connection.
Ramdev and Balkrishna have tendered an “unconditional and unqualified apology” before the apex court over the misleading advertisements issued by Patanjali Ayurved. They acknowledged breaching the court’s order from November 21, 2023, which prohibited making false claims about the medicinal efficacy of their products.
The court had noted that Patanjali Ayurved Ltd had assured it of complying with all laws, especially regarding advertising and branding, and refraining from making false claims about medicinal efficacy. However, their subsequent actions led to the issuance of a notice to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.
The Supreme Court, last week, dismissed their “unconditional apology,” deeming their actions as “wilful, deliberate, and repeated violations” of its orders.
Also Read : BSP Announces Eleven Candidates for Lok Sabha Polls in Uttar Pradesh, Fields Challenger Against PM Modi
During the recent hearing, the court heavily criticized Ramdev, labeling his behavior as “irresponsible.” The bench fixed the next hearing for April 23, with both Ramdev and Balkrishna present.
Ramdev expressed remorse for their actions and offered an apology, but the bench questioned the sincerity of their apology, stating that their conduct demonstrated repeated violations.
The contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved was filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA). During a previous hearing, the court also criticized the Uttarakhand government for its role in licensing Patanjali products, questioning the authorities’ actions in the matter.
