Patanjali’s Penalization and Misleading Advertisements

Why did the Court penalize Patanjali?

The Supreme Court penalized Patanjali for discrediting allopathy in its advertising campaigns and for promoting products as ‘permanent relief’ for chronic conditions, which was deemed misleading and a violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.

Is the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954, ineffective in stopping misleading ads?

The Act faces challenges in enforcement, leading to few convictions. Despite mechanisms to identify and penalize misleading advertisements, companies like Patanjali have repeated offenses, indicating limitations in the law’s effectiveness.

What has the court ruled?

The court issued a contempt notice to Patanjali and its managing director for violating directives against making exaggerated claims and discrediting allopathy. It also criticized the Centre for inaction and placed a temporary ban on advertisements of medicinal products by Patanjali.

How harmful are the ‘miracle cures’ offered by Patanjali?

‘Miracle cures’ offered by Patanjali for diseases like diabetes are considered harmful as they can lead to public health risks. Misleading claims about curing chronic conditions can result in delayed or inappropriate treatment, further endangering people’s health.

SRIRAM’s