Advertisements case: SC requests a public apology from Baba Ramdev and Balkrishna and states they are not yet off the hook

Yoga master Ramdev, his assistant Balkrishna, and Patanjali Ayurved were given a week by the Supreme Court on Tuesday to publicly apologize in the misleading marketing case, but the court made it clear that they would not be “off the hook” at this point.

Attending the hearing in person, Ramdev and Balkrishna individually offered the Supreme Court unequivocal apologies.

Although the bench consisting of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah acknowledged their apology, it made it clear that it had not chosen to “let them off the hook” just yet.

“You are working well, but you cannot diminish allopathy,” Balkrishna was informed by the bench during their conversation.

Interacting with the bench as well, Ramdev said he had no intention of disrespecting the court in any way.

The bench, however, informed Balkrishna that Patanjali was not so naïve as to be unaware of the contents of the Supreme Court’s previous rulings in the matter.

Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, representing Ramdev and Balkrishna, informed the bench right away, “I am willing to give a public apology.”

Ramdev and Balkrishna, who were both present in court, were invited by the top court to go forward so they could speak with the bench. The bench said, “They ought to feel a connection with the court.”

The subject has now been scheduled for a follow-up hearing before the Supreme Court on April 23.

A “unconditional and unqualified apology” was submitted by Ramdev and Balkrishna to the Supreme Court last week in response to advertising released by the company that made exaggerated claims about the therapeutic value of its goods.

Ramdev and Balkrishna have submitted two distinct affidavits to the court, in which they unconditionally apologize for the “breach of the statement” noted in the Supreme Court’s November 21st, 2018 judgment.

In the order dated November 21, 2023, the Supreme Court mentioned that the legal representative of Patanjali Ayurved had given it the assurance that “from now on, there won’t be any infractions of any laws, particularly concerning the branding or advertising of its manufactured and marketed products and, additionally, that no trite remarks asserting therapeutic effectiveness or disparaging any medical system will be disclosed to the media in any manner.”

Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. was declared “bound down to such assurance” by the supreme Court.

The Supreme Court was dissatisfied with their disregard for the particular guarantee and their following remarks in the media, so it sent them a notice asking them to clarify why they would not be facing contempt.