Ramdev’s Fresh Apology In Misleading Ads Case, Bigger Than Yesterday’s

Patanjali put out an apology yesterday. The ad occupies one-fourth of a newspaper page and is titled “Unconditional Public Apology.”

It addresses the ongoing matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and expresses regret for non-compliance with the court’s directions and orders. The apology extends to a meeting/press conference and a commitment to avoid repeating such errors.

It is signed by Patanjali Ayurved Limited, Acharya Balkrishna, and Swami Ramdev. The ad published yesterday was smaller and did not specifically mention the names of Ramdev and Balkrishna.

During a court hearing, it was questioned whether the apology had been published prominently. The court insisted on seeing the actual size of the apology and emphasized the need for it to be clearly visible without enlargement.

The court has set the next hearing for April 30 and has summoned Ramdev and Balkrishna to appear in court. The legal battle between Patanjali and the Indian Medical Association (IMA) has escalated following a dispute over certification from the World Health Organization and controversial statements made by Ramdev.

The IMA has sent a legal notice to Ramdev and demanded an apology. The conflict between Patanjali and the IMA began after the publication of an advertisement making claims about the effectiveness of Patanjali drugs in curing various diseases.

In response to a warning from the Supreme Court, Patanjali assured that there would be no further violation of laws related to advertisement and branding of products. However, the court received an anonymous letter mentioning continued misleading advertisements by Patanjali.

The court asked Patanjali to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against it. In a hearing on April 2, the court criticized Ramdev and Balkrishna for their “absolute defiance” in not filing proper affidavits over the misleading advertisements.

Their subsequent apologies were rejected on April 10 as the court found them insincere. In a hearing on April 16, the court asked the two to demonstrate their intent to apologize.