‘We do not accept’: Supreme Court on Ramdev’s apology in Patanjali ‘misleading’ ads case

The court was upset about a press conference held by Ramdev on November 22, 2023, in Haridwar and an advertisement issued by the company on December 4, 2023, in alleged violation of the November 21, 2023, undertaking.

As the court had expressed dissatisfaction with their earlier affidavits tendering apology, fresh affidavits were filed on April 6 tendering unqualified and unconditional apologies.

Justice Kohli said, “The apologies that are on record are on paper. We think that having been caught on the wrong foot and noticing that their back is actually against the wall and having gone to town saying all sorts of things on the very next day of the order passed where your own counsel had given undertakings, we do not accept these affidavits. We decline to accept or condone it. We consider it a wilful and deliberate violation of the order and breach of the order passed in the undertaking…don’t think your writing, unconditional multiple times in the affidavit is enough to satisfy this court. This was a deliberate violation of the order.”

In its order, the court said, “Having regard to the entire history of the matter, and the past conduct of the respondents, we have expressed our reservations about accepting the latest affidavit filed by them.” The bench will hear their matter again on April 16.

The court also found fault in the application filed by the duo on the last date of hearing seeking exemption from appearance on the ground that they had to travel abroad.

The court took umbrage that the affidavits were sworn a day before the date of issue of the air tickets. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Ramdev, Balkrishna and Patanjali sought to explain that this was because the tickets were issued a day after but the court was not convinced and said the “assumption is the respondents were trying to wriggle out of their personal appearance.”

“We have also pointed out to counsel for the proposed contemnors that even after notices to show cause were issued to the respondents and they were directed to remain present before this court, they had attempted to wriggle out of their personal presence by moving applications seeking exemption on the ground that they were travelling abroad. To demonstrate this fact, affidavits were filed by them with the applications on March 30, 2024, referring to the tickets purchased by their travel agent for purposes of conducting travel abroad which strangely enough were issued on the next date to which the affidavits were sworn, i.e. on March 31, 2024. When confronted with the aforesaid position on the last date of hearing, Advocate, appearing for the respondent, had sought time to obtain clarifications,” the order added.

It further said, “It is now been stated in the affidavit filed by the proposed contemnors that admittedly the tickets were issued on a date after the affidavit was sworn…Fact remains that on the date, the affidavits were shown, there was no such ticket in existence (at the time the affidavits were sworn). And therefore, the assumption is the respondents were trying to wriggle out of their personal appearance before this court, which is most acceptable.”

The court also pulled up the state of Uttarakhand for failing to act against Patanjali and its subsidiary Divya Pharmacy for advertisements promising cures for diseases and sought affidavits from officials who had been holding the post of Joint Director of the State Licensing Authority, Haridwar between 2018 till date, explaining what they had done to check this.