The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) against Patanjali concerning misleading advertisements related to traditional medicine practices. The IMA’s complaint against Patanjali stemmed from claims that Patanjali’s advertising was deceptive and undermined modern medical practices. This case followed changes in regulations.
The Ministry of AYUSH, on July 1, 2024, amended a rule connected to the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. Before this change, companies had to obtain prior approval from state licensing authorities to advertise Ayurvedic, Siddha, or Unani medicines to prevent false or exaggerated claims. The amendment removed this requirement.
In August 2024, the case was heard by a separate Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta. This bench suspended the amendment, essentially reinstating the approval process temporarily. However, Justice K.V. Viswanathan questioned the state’s ability to enforce a rule removed by the central government. Justice B.V. Nagarathna then suggested the case be closed.
The court held that it could not reinstate a provision removed by the central government. Previously, the court had taken action regarding misleading advertisements, the regulatory authorities’ lack of action on Patanjali’s practices, and the roles of Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna. Contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved were also initiated, but were later closed.