Supreme Court Lets Baba Ramdev et al Off the Hook—Drops Contempt Proceedings
Supreme Court Lets Baba Ramdev et al Off the Hook—Drops Contempt Proceedings
The Apex Court Accepts the Unconditional Apology of the Contemners and their Undertaking Not to Repeat their Transgressions.
Contempt Proceedings—Background and Controversy
Ending a highly publicised legal saga, the Supreme Court of India today (13th August) closed the contempt of court proceedings against Baba Ramdev and his associate, Acharya Balkrishna, founders of Patanjali Ayurved. The case, which had drawn considerable attention due to the high-profile nature of the individuals and organisations involved and the wider implications for public health, stemmed from allegations of misleading advertisements and claims by Patanjali Ayurved.
The Indian Medical Association (IMA) had filed a petition against Patanjali, accusing the company of running a smear campaign against modern medicine and promoting unverified claims regarding their Ayurvedic products, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The case was further complicated by statements made by Baba Ramdev, which were perceived as undermining the efficacy of modern medical practices and vaccines, thereby posing a risk to public health.
Interim Proceedings and Court Directives
The Supreme Court took the allegations seriously, given the potential harm to public trust in both traditional and modern medicine. In November 2023, the Court issued strict instructions to Patanjali and its founders, prohibiting them from making any further "casual statements" or publishing misleading advertisements about their products. The Court's orders were clear: compliance was non-negotiable.
However, despite these directives, Patanjali continued to be in the spotlight for allegedly violating these orders. This led the Supreme Court to initiate contempt proceedings in March 2024. The Court issued notices to Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, demanding their personal appearance and accountability. The Bench expressed its discontent with the company's ongoing practices, which were in direct conflict with the assurances given to the Court.
The Final Verdict
After several months of protracted legal battles, multiple hearings, and public apologies by the contemnors, the Supreme Court today decided to close the contempt proceedings. In its final ruling, the Bench comprising Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah acknowledged and accepted the unqualified apologies tendered by Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, both in Court and through public channels.
The Court observed that while the initial conduct of the contemnors was in clear violation of their undertakings, the subsequent efforts to make amends, including public apologies in national and regional newspapers, demonstrated a genuine attempt to rectify the situation. With this in mind, the Court accepted their apologies and closed the matter, albeit with a stern warning against any future violations of Court orders1.
Larger Implications and the Court’s Stance
This case highlights the Supreme Court's commitment to ensuring that influential individuals and corporations adhere strictly to the law, especially when public health is at stake. The Court’s warning to the contemnors underscores the gravity of their actions and serves as a reminder that compliance with judicial orders is paramount.
In addition to addressing the specific issues with Patanjali, the Court also took the opportunity to issue broader warnings to regulatory authorities and social media influencers. The Court pointed out the inaction of the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority, criticizing them for their failure to regulate and monitor misleading advertisements effectively. This criticism extended to the officers in charge, who were ordered to explain their lack of action in detail.
Conclusion: No One is Above the Law
The Supreme Court’s handling of this case sends a clear message: those who consider themselves powerful or influential cannot place themselves above the law. This principle holds especially true in matters where the health and safety of millions of citizens are at risk. The promotion of "miracle drugs" under the guise of trusted Ayurvedic practices, when not properly regulated, can have devastating consequences.
Was the Apex Court Lenient?
While some may view the Court's decision to drop the contempt charges as lenient, it is essential to understand that the primary objective of contempt proceedings is not to satisfy the egos of individual judges but to uphold the sanctity of court orders and ensure their meticulous compliance. An unconditional apology, if deemed sincere and followed by corrective action, is often sufficient to resolve such cases. However, the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that any future transgressions will be met with swift and severe consequences. This case reinforces the notion that the law applies equally to all, and that compliance is not optional, especially when public trust and safety are on the line2.
Citations
Here are the citations presented as clickable links:
Supreme Court Slams Uttarakhand in Patanjali Misleading Ads Contempt Case - LiveLaw
Yoga Guru Ramdev's Patanjali Foods Gets Show Cause Notice for GST Dues - NDTV
R. CONCLUSION (Operative part of the Supreme Court Judgment)
60. On an overall conspectus of the facts of the present case and the sequence of events that have transpired from November, 2023 till May, 2024, we are of the opinion that though the initial conduct of the proposed contemnors prior to their tendering an apology to the Court showed that the same was in violation of the undertakings given to this Court, subsequent thereto, after they tendered an unqualified apology to this Court, efforts have been made by them to take steps to make amends. This was not only by expressing regret for their conduct on affidavit and in person, but also by taking steps to publicize the apology tendered by them through advertisements published prominently Page 40 of 41 in the National and Regional newspapers. No doubt the wisdom of tendering an 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.
61. Given the attendant facts and circumstances of the case and the effort made by the proposed contemnors to absolve themselves of acts that amounted to breach of undertakings given to this Court, we are inclined to accept the apology tendered by them and close the matter. At the same time, they are cautioned to strictly abide by the terms of their undertakings. Any future intransigence on their part, whether by act, deed or speech that could 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 be flourished as swiftly as these proceedings were originally initiated.
62. With the aforesaid orders, the present proceedings are closed and the notice to show cause issued to the proposed contemnors is discharged.
…………………………………… J [HIMA KOHLI]
..…………………………………… J [AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH]
NEW DELHI AUGUST 13, 2024
Page 41 of 41
