GUWAHATI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday, April 30, criticised the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) for its prolonged inaction against Patanjali Ayurved's misleading advertisements, pointing out that the authority seemed to act only after the apex court issued restrictions in April 2024.
A Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah noted that the SLA took swift action against Patanjali Ayurved by suspending licenses and filing a criminal complaint after being reprimanded by the Supreme Court. However, the Bench asked why the authority had failed to act for years prior to the court's intervention.
Click here to join our WhatsApp channel
"Within 7-8 days, you did all that you were supposed to do. How do you explain inaction for years?" the Court asked, emphasising the SLA's duty to ensure compliance with laws governing the sale and advertisement of drugs.
The SLA's affidavit filed earlier in the week stated that it filed a criminal complaint against Patanjali Ayurved and its founders, Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, for violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act. The Court found the SLA's apology insufficient and demanded explanations for its delayed response.
Senior advocate Dhruv Mehta, appearing for the SLA, explained the recent actions taken by the licensing authority, including the suspension of licences for 14 of Patanjali's products. However, the Bench questioned whether these measures were initiated solely because of the Supreme Court's earlier orders.
"Long and short is that when you want to move, you move like lightning! And when you don't want to, you don't. In three days flat, you have done all that you needed to do!" Justice Kohli remarked.
The Court pointed out contradictions in the SLA's affidavit, challenging its claims of vigilance, and suggested that the affidavit contained recycled text from previous submissions. The Bench also noted that specific SLA officers had failed to conduct the necessary inspections in a timely manner, questioning their accountability.
Following these observations, the Supreme Court directed the SLA to submit additional affidavits with further explanations for its delay in acting against Patanjali Ayurved. The Bench granted 10 days for the SLA to file the new affidavits and scheduled the matter for further hearing on May 14.
Regarding the public apology from Patanjali, the Court indicated that the company had failed to comply with an earlier order requiring the submission of original copies of the apology published in newspapers. Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, representing Baba Ramdev, admitted the lapse and promised to rectify it.
ALSO READ: Large Cache Of Arms and Ammunition Seized Near Indo-Myanmar Border
The matter will be heard again on May 7, with other licencing authorities from states other than Uttarakhand expected to attend the hearing to discuss compliance with the Court's directives and regulations governing advertising in the pharmaceutical industry. The Bench clarified that it expects concrete measures from these authorities to ensure public safety and compliance with legal standards.
The Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) had issued an apology to the Supreme Court on Monday for its perceived lack of decisive action against Patanjali Ayurved. The authority tendered an unconditional apology for any inadvertent or unintentional non-compliance with the Supreme Court's orders.
