While hearing a contempt case against Patanjali Ayurveda for continuously publishing misleading advertisements in violation of its court duties, the Supreme Court today grilled the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) for its inaction in the matter. denounced.
On April 4, the court issued a notice to the Uttarakhand authorities seeking an affidavit regarding the action taken against Divya Pharmacy (belonging to Patanjali Yogpeeth Trust) over advertisements.
bench Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Asanuddin Amanullah; While rejecting the second apology affidavit filed by Patanjali Ayurveda, its managing director Acharya Balkrishna and co-founder Baba Ramdev questioned why the state authorities were colluding with the suspects. I questioned SLA whether it should be considered that there is.
”[We] I am appalled that the competent authorities within the State Licensing Department have not done anything other than push the file.Communication between the Union of India and the State Licensing Authority [shows] An obvious attempt on the part of the state agency to shift responsibility and somehow delay the matter, even though the state licensing board was first informed about the misleading advertising sometime in 2018. It is. , state licensing authorities remain in a deep slumber. ”dictated Kohli, J. as part of the order.
Sr Adv Dhruv MehtaAppearing on behalf of the SLA, the state officials have filed an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court in 2019 under the application of Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, which prohibits advertising of Ayurvedic medicines. He tried to convince the court that he was acting in a way that , stayed overnight. However, the court initially rejected this argument as follows: “Absolute trash”.
While emphasizing that the act of the accused is in violation of the Narcotic Drugs and Other Magical Remedies (Offensive Advertisement) Act, 1954, it is only because the Bombay High Court has passed an order regarding the Rules of 1945. No action was taken, asked Colch J. : “Are regulations higher than laws?”
After hearing the parties and the co-directors of SLA who were present in person in court, the court directed the predecessor of the current co-director of SLA to file an affidavit within two weeks explaining his inactions during his tenure. . As a licensing authority. Further, all district Ayurveda and Unani officers who held office from 2018 till date have also been directed to file similar affidavits during the same period.
In addition to the proposed accuser, the court was also inclined to issue contempt notices against the defender of the affidavit (currently SLA Joint Director), his predecessor. However, I refrained from doing so for the time being. The matter (as far as the proposed accuser is concerned) was listed for further orders on 16 April.
interaction in court
After conveying to senior Mukul Rohatgi (Patanjali and its MD) that Patanjali was not willing to accept the freshly filed apology affidavit, the court asked Dhruv to express concern over the state’s conduct in the matter.・I relied on Mehta (who appeared in court as an SLA agent). .
“Do you think you had a protective umbrella under the guise of an order passed by the High Court? Why did you not point out the provisions of the law?” Dhruv Mehta’s J Kohli asked.
Mehta replied: “A show cause notice has been issued…”
Judge Kohli retorted: “Why didn’t you point out that there are laws that go beyond regulations that have not been enjoined by the courts?”
Dhruv Mehta: Agree…
Amanullah, J: Let’s be clear that there are two laws. The stay was about another law. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Tell your guidance counselor to write down everything we say. I have 20 flags. You must respond specifically.If you cannot reply, the order details will be displayed.
Kohli, J: we combed your letter
Dhruv Mehta: Your Honour’s point is correct…but they undertook and stopped publication…after an interim order of the Bombay High Court.
Amanullah, J: Two years later, [….] Should someone let you know that?Oh, very nice
Kohli, J: When they (Patanjali) violate this so-called… As far as we can see, they seem to be pretty used to violating… They violate court orders, they violate their commitments to the court. Do…they treat you the same way, what are you doing?
Dhruv Mehta: You must act according to the law…
Kohli, J: now? in the future?After we take action against you
Dhruv Mehta: Your Lordships are right…statutes give us the power to take action.
Kohli, J: Why didn’t you exercise it? According to the central government, they can only tell you…The executions are to be carried out by you, the state. What were you waiting for us to prompt you?
Amanullah, J: We’re not going to set you free. Broadly speaking, we’re just showing. First of all, you will receive a letter from the Federal Ministry. It’s clear the ball is in your court. They say please kindly stop it or register an FIR if it is not being done. 2020 provides clear instructions. Then all this is done. […] will be forwarded to you. You, the licensing authority, will forward it to the district Ayush officer. The permitting department has written to the district Ayush officer telling him to conduct an investigation and report. What the district Ayush officer will do is forward the reply…say it will be forwarded to you for action. You return it to the Union. Union said it’s not my domain. This happened 6 times!Back and forth, back and forth
Kohli, J: need to explain one’s actions
Amanullah, J: Now, let’s get to the core. The person who was the license inspector remains silent. He takes no action against the officers. No report will be filed against him by the officer, he will only be forwarded. He is a postman. Report does not. The same shall apply to his successor. Why shouldn’t all three police officers be suspended here?I will pause here for a moment.
Kohli, J: Neglect of duty…What is the job of a drug enforcement officer and licensing officer? Do you want to push the file?
Dhruv Mehta: On February 10, 2023, the Ministry of Ayush wrote to me, the Licensing Authority, that the interim orders passed by the Delhi and Bombay High Courts pertain to Article 170 rules.
Amanullah, J: but, you are…
Dhruv Mehta: It was a genuine impression…
Amanullah, J: We strongly oppose the use of the word “authentic” in reference to officers. please do not. I don’t mean to belittle it. I’ll seriously tear you apart!
Kohli, J: Police officers just sit and wait for instructions from other authorities to act according to the law. It seems like you didn’t know about the enactment of this law until the central government told you about it.Why shouldn’t we think you’re in cahoots with the accused? You’re willfully closing your eyes
To highlight the violation of the Drug and Magical Remedies Act, the court referred to a letter written by Divya Pharmacy to the SLA, in which the company stated: “The content of the advertisement is thought-provoking in nature and treatment options in the management of the disease.”
Kohli, J: They tap you under the nose and say it’s essentially a suggestive ad, and do you accept that? They claim that the purpose of the advertisements placed is to keep people associated with Ayurvedic medicines as if they were the ones who first came up with Ayurvedic medicines. There are other companies on the market that sell the exact same drug. It’s not like the general public isn’t aware of it. Indian citizens are as aware about alternative medicines as they are about allopathic treatments.
Dhruv Mehta: Not accepted
Kohli, J: So what did you say back? there is nothing.Except maybe writing some more letters.
At this stage, defendant Dhruv Mehta tried to argue that the co-director of SLA had only joined in June 2023. The said officer attended the court and interacted with the court.
When he came out, Amanullah J asked the police officer: “Do you have the guts to do what you are doing? Are you aware of your position as a bureaucrat and a state official?” Before you scream, “I’m ashamed!”
“Did you receive any legal assistance from the legal department?”added Justice Kohli. The judge went on to ask: “Kis buniyad pe aapne ye order pass kiya ki unko warn kara jaega…aapne Center ko ye likha ki unko warn kiya jaega aur Bombay High Court ka ek aadesh hai jiske binah pe aapko lagta tha ki Drugs and Magic Remedies Act ko bhi Bombay ” “The High Court said, “Are you okay with this? What do you feel?” (On what basis did the High Court give the order to warn them? I wrote a letter warning them and the Bombay High Court issued a direction on that basis to consider that narcotics and magical remedies were also separated/stayed in the Bombay High Court Who gave this impression? ?)
Amanullah, J: Kyun nahi hum ye maan line ki aapki mili bhagat hai? (Why can’t I believe you were wearing gloves?)
board member: Ye sab mere join karne se pehle ka hai (This all happened before I joined)
Kohli, J: You are sub apki chittiyan hain. Usse, aap nahi nikal sakte. Apne hastakshaal kie hain impe. Usse, pere, johua, hua. Apne bi apna mind apply nahi kiya? Warning ka bhi koi anushthaan tha Act mein…public ko agar nuksaan bhi hua, koi mar bhi gai toh warning se chalega? (These are your letters. You cannot run away from this .You signed these. Whatever happened before, that’s what happened. You also didn’t apply your thinking? Was there a caveat provision in the law too?. .If the public had been harmed, someone had died, would a warning have been enough?)
board member: Act May Surf […] Dwara Incident Darji Kiya Jaana Chahie (Based on Law) […] (Need to file a case)
bench: Toh aapne June, 2023 se ab tak kab case darj kiya? (So when did you register a case after June 2023?)
board member: Carenge, sir (I’ll do it, sir)
Kohli, J: when?you work in public health
Amanullah, J: I will make you an abettor of that crime. Abhi toh shuruaat hai, dekhiye kya hota hai (This is the beginning, see what happens)
The court found that SLA’s current co-directors had sufficient time to carry out their duties, even though they took office in June 2023. But he didn’t. As Mr. Dhruv Mehta wished his last chance on behalf of the joint director, Justice Kohli said:
“What’s the problem, Mr. Mehta? What will become of the one man who begs for mercy, and the faceless people who have taken this drug with good intentions? Sold and touted as a cure? What is this? And here is a cure for an incurable disease. Several letters have been written to him and people are filing complaints.”
During the adjournment, Mr. Dhruv Mehta tried to add that SLA was not originally a party to the proceedings, but Mr. Amanatullah J. retorted: “What a great argument. Since you were not a party, are you exempt from fulfilling your obligations under the law?”
Finally, the court commented that this incident did not exemplify negligence, but rather deliberate folly. Additionally, we were told that if the delay had been several months, perhaps some exoneration could have been offered.
“We don’t spell it out, but we know how these follies were committed”, Justice Kohli was heard speaking.
In the previous hearing, the court had accused the federal government of turning a blind eye when Patanjali promoted fake treatments for the coronavirus at the height of the pandemic.
Also from today’s hearing: Supreme Court says Dr Patanjali and Baba Ramdev cited non-existent airline tickets to avoid personal appearances.refused second apology
Case Title: Medical Association of India vs. Union of India | WP(C) No.645/2022
