In a significant development, the Supreme Court admonished Baba Ramdev and Patanjali MD Acharya Balkrishna in contempt proceedings concerning misleading medical advertisements. The Court stressed the importance of respecting allopathy and raised concerns over the publication of misleading advertisements despite earlier undertakings.
During the proceedings, the bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah questioned Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna regarding press conferences and advertisements published subsequent to earlier undertakings given to the Court. Despite Baba Ramdev’s apology, the Court clarified that it had not accepted the apology yet and highlighted the significance of acknowledging past actions.
The Court expressed displeasure over the publication of misleading advertisements and emphasized the need for accountability, especially considering the stature of the individuals involved and the extensive reach of their platforms. Justice Kohli firmly underscored that such actions cannot be excused, particularly when undertaken by entities with significant resources and legal departments.
Furthermore, the Court rebuked the duo for insulting allopathy and reminded them to focus on their work without disparaging others. This admonition underscores the need for responsible conduct, particularly in the realm of public health and medical practices.
The interaction between the Court and the respondents highlighted the gravity of the issue and the expectations placed on individuals with influential public platforms. Despite attempts to justify their actions, the Court remained steadfast in emphasizing accountability and adherence to legal obligations.
As the proceedings continue, the Supreme Court’s stance sends a clear message about the importance of upholding legal commitments and respecting diverse medical practices. The implications of this case extend beyond the individuals involved, impacting broader discussions about healthcare ethics and professional conduct.
This episode underscores the role of the judiciary in safeguarding public interest and ensuring compliance with regulatory standards, particularly in sensitive areas such as healthcare. As the case progresses, stakeholders will closely monitor the Court’s rulings and their implications for the future of medical advertising and professional conduct.
Case Title: INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
