23 April 2024 12:17 PM GMT
In the contempt case pending against Patanjali over publication of misleading advertisements, the Supreme Court today clarified that it was not dealing with Patanjali as a standalone entity; rather, the Court's concern, in public interest, extended to all those Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs)/drugs companies which take consumers of their products for a ride through misleading advertisements.
The bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah recorded in the order, "we must clarify that we are not here to gun for a particular party, or a particular agency or a particular authority. This is absolutely a PIL, since it is in the larger interest of the consumers, the public to know which way they are going and how and why they can be misled and how [...] is acting to prevent that misuse. At the end of the day, this is also as we said a part of the process of rule of law. If that is violated, then it affects [...]".
The court observed that the implementation of laws regulating misleading ads in relation to medicines require deeper examination, as the products are used for babies, school going children and senior citizens based on the ads:
"We are of the opinion that the issue relating to implementation of the relevant provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act and the Rules, the Drugs and Cosmetic Act and the Rules, and the Consumers Act and the relevant Rules needs closer examination in the light of the grievances raised by the petitioner...not just limited to the respondents before this court but to all similarly situated/placed FMCGs who have [...] misleading advertisements, and taking the public for a ride...affecting the health of babies, school going children and senior citizens who have been consuming products on the basis of the said misrepresentation."
Moreover, taking into account the misleading ads issued in electronic media, the court impleaded the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Ministry of Information Technology, and Ministry of Consumer Affairs. The same was done with a view to examine the steps taken by these Ministries to prevent abuse of Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act 1954 (and the Rules), the Drugs and Cosmetic Act 1940 (and Rules) and the Consumer Protection Act.
The matter has been posted to May 7.
Also from the hearing - 'Is Your Apology As Big As Your Advertisements?' : Supreme Court Asks Patanjali Ayurved
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022