The Supreme Court on Tuesday remarked that the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority seemed to have realised its powers to act against Patanjali Ayurved only after the court criticised it, Bar and Bench reported.
A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah made the observation a day after the authority said that the manufacturing licences of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved and Divya Pharmacy were suspended for violating the 1945 Drugs and Cosmetic Rules.
The State Licensing Authority also said it filed a complaint against Patanjali Ayurved, the company’s co-founder yoga guru Ramdev and Managing Director Balkrishna for violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies Objectionable Advertisements Act.
The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that Uttarakhand authorities seemed to have “woke up” and acted against Patanjali Ayurved only after judicial intervention, The Hindu reported.
“Long and short is that when you want to move, you move like lightning,” Justice Kohli remarked. “And when you don't want to you don't...In three days flat, you have done all that you needed to do! But you should have done all that much earlier.”
The court was hearing a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against Patanjali Ayurved accusing the company of carrying out a “smear campaign” against modern medicine and the Covid-19 vaccination drive.
In its previous hearings, the court had reprimanded Ramdev and Balkrishna for an advertisement issued by their company on December 4 after it had said in an undertaking on November 21 that it would not make any “casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine”.
On March 20, Balkrishna tendered an “unqualified apology” and said that he had the highest regard for the rule of law, adding that Patanjali Ayurved would ensure it did not issue any such advertisements in the future. The court, however, refused to accept the apology and described it as mere lip service.
At a hearing on April 10, the court had ordered the current and previous officers of the Uttarakhand licensing authority to file detailed affidavits explaining why they did not take action against Patanjali under the Drugs and Magic Remedies Objectionable Advertisements Act for misleading advertisements.
On that day, the Supreme Court rejected Patanjali’s second apology, and said Balkrishna and Ramdev only expressed remorse when they were “caught on the wrong foot”.
After Patanjali issued a fresh unconditional apology in several newspapers on April 24, the bench on Tuesday said that there was a “marked improvement” in the company’s stand, PTI reported.
Justice Amanullah said that earlier apologies only had the company’s name. “Now the names have come,” he noted. “It is a marked improvement, we appreciate that.”
The case will be taken up next on May 7, when licensing authorities from other states are also expected to be heard.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!