New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday closed the contempt case against Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved's Managing Director Acharya Balkrishna in connection with the misleading advertisements case. The apex court accepted their undertakings to stop issuing misleading ads and other claims regarding Patanjali products.
A bench led by Justice Hima Kohli and comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah said that given the sequence of events that have transpired from November 2023 till May 2024, the court was of the opinion that "though the initial conduct of the proposed contemnors, Swami Ramdev and Balkrishna, prior to their tendering apology to the court showed that the same is in violation of the undertakings given to this court, subsequently there too, after they tendered an unqualified apology to this court, efforts have been made by them to take steps to make amends".
The bench said that this was not only by expressing regret for their conduct on affidavit and in person but also by taking steps to publicise the apology tendered by them through advertisements published prominently in national and regional newspapers.
“No doubt, the wisdom of tendering and unconditional apology dawned belatedly on the proposed contemnors after this court rejected the first attempt made by them to offer a qualified apology. But their subsequent conduct demonstrates that they have made sincere efforts to purge themselves”, said Justice Kohli, pronouncing the judgment on behalf of the bench.
The bench said that given the facts and circumstances of the case and the efforts made by the proposed contemnors to absolve themselves of acts that amounted to a breach of the undertaking given to this court, it was "inclined to accept the apology tendered by them and close the matter". "At the same time, they are cautioned to abide by their undertakings”, the bench said.
It cautioned Ramdev and Balkrishna that any breach in future on their part, whether by act, deed or speech, that could be tantamount to violating the orders of the court or dishonouring the terms of the undertakings, shall be viewed strictly, and the ensuing consequences could indeed be grave.
“In that eventuality, the sword of contempt that has now been returned to rest in its sheath shall flourish as swiftly as these proceedings were originally initiated. With the aforesaid orders, the present proceedings are closed, and the notice to show cause issued to the proposed contemnors is discharged”, said the bench.
The apex court passed the judgment in connection with misleading ads and other claims regarding Patanjali products. The detailed judgment will be uploaded later in the day.
The contempt proceedings originated from a plea filed by the Indian Medication Association raising a grievance against Patanjali, its managing director – Acharya Balkrishna and its primary proponent, Baba Ramdev stating that they have been indulging in a campaign of misinformation and disparagement against the modern system of medicine in an orchestrated and systematic manner resulting in misleading the common man.
During the hearing, the apex court had admonished Patanjali for spreading misinformation that could undermine public trust in the health care system. The apex court had recorded an undertaking by the company in November 2023 that it would stop running any misleading advertisements and issuing disparaging statements against the modern medicine system.
However, the IMA brought on record a video clip of a press conference held by Ramdev and also Patanjali advertisements in national media merely a day after their undertaking in the court on November 21 last year.
The apex court, in its judgment, said: "first affidavit filed by Acharya Balkrishna, on 20th March 2024, though he purportedly tendered an unqualified apology on behalf of Patanjali for the breach of statement recorded in the order dated 21st November, 2023, we had rejected the said affidavit for the reason that the deponent had tried to justify his conduct by seeking to offer an explanation for the advertisements issued, which is impermissible".
Thereafter, fresh affidavits were filed by Acharya Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev on 6th April, 2024 wherein, an unconditional and unqualified apology was tendered by them for the breach of the statement recorded in a para of the order dated 21st November 2023.
A further undertaking was given by them that they will ensure that the statement recorded on their behalf is complied with and that no offending advertisement will be issued in the future.
On 16th April 2024, Acharya Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev, who were directed to remain present in court in terms of earlier orders, stepped forward and orally tendered their unqualified apology to this court for having called a press conference on 22nd November 2023 and for having continued to issue misleading advertisements and making derogatory statements in respect of other systems of treatment.
They assured the apex court that they would be more careful in future and not violate any orders of the court or the undertaking given to this court or violate any provisions of law.
The counsel for contemnors had also stated that to redeem themselves and demonstrate their bona fides, they proposed to take some steps on their own. These steps included tendering a public apology in the press for which Acharya Balkrishna filed an affidavit on 24th April 2024, stating inter alia that an initiative had been taken to publish the public apology in various national and regional newspapers having wide circulation across the country.
"However, when the said advertisements were handed over for the perusal of the court, the purported public apologies were rejected as meaningless and a mere lip service. This was for the reason that the public apologies were published in the newspapers in such fine print that the same were virtually illegible. This court opined that the said apology was more of an empty formality than an expression of genuine contrition," said the bench, in its 41-page judgment.
The bench noted that later public apology carried in various national and regional newspapers was not only in bold words but also published at prominent places.
"Acharya Balkrishna filed an affidavit on 14th May, 2024, listing the steps that were being taken to bring down the advertisements of such of the products manufactured by Patanjali whose licenses had been suspended by the State of Uttarakhand and for recalling the said medicines from other agencies as also from the online e-commerce platform of Patanjali," noted the bench.
Qualified apology vis-à-vis unconditional apology
The apex court said: “We may next touch upon the aspect of a qualified apology vis-à-vis an unconditional apology. It must be understood that any apology tendered by a party in contempt proceedings must be unconditional and unqualified".
"Such an apology must also demonstrate that it has been made with a bona fide intention and not just to wriggle out of a tight situation. Tendering a qualified apology is akin to a game of dice. It could either have a positive outcome or a negative result," said the bench.
The apex court said that if the contemnor tenders a conditional apology and expects luck to play a role in the outcome of such an apology, then he should be ready to face the consequence of an outright rejection
Read More
Conclusion:
