The Supreme Court has closed the hearing on the Indian Medical Association’s (IMA) petition challenging Patanjali’s advertisements. The IMA had approached the court, alleging that Patanjali Ayurveda made misleading claims about its products and criticized modern medicine. The situation has a timeline linked to a change in regulations.
On July 1, 2024, the Ministry of AYUSH amended a rule within the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. This amendment previously required companies to seek approval from state licensing authorities before advertising Ayurvedic, Siddha, or Unani medicines to prevent false claims. The amendment eliminated this requirement.
The case was then presented to a Supreme Court bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta in August 2024, which put a hold on the amendment, effectively reinstating the approval requirement temporarily. However, Justice K.V. Viswanathan raised questions about a state government’s ability to enforce a rule the central government had already repealed. Justice B.V. Nagarathna then proposed to close the case.
The court affirmed that it cannot reinstate a provision removed by the central government. Earlier, the court had taken action related to misleading advertisements, the inactivity of regulatory bodies concerning Patanjali, and the involvement of Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna. Contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved were also initiated, but they were subsequently dismissed.