In a significant development, Patanjali Ayurved managing director Acharya Balkrishna submitted an unqualified apology before the Supreme Court regarding the alleged misleading advertisements. This move came just two days after the court directed yoga guru Baba Ramdev and company managing director Acharya Balkrishna to appear before it.

Background

The controversy stemmed from advertisements released by Patanjali that claimed to promote Ayurvedic products capable of curing various ailments. However, these ads were deemed misleading and raised concerns about their efficacy and accuracy. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) had filed a case against Patanjali, alleging that the company’s claims were not backed by scientific evidence.

The Apology

Acharya Balkrishna expressed regret for the misleading advertisements in an affidavit filed before the Supreme Court. He clarified that these ads aimed to encourage citizens to lead healthier lives by consuming Patanjali’s products. The company emphasized its commitment to Ayurveda and its quest to provide evidence-based solutions for lifestyle-related medical complications.

The affidavit highlighted several key points:

1. No Repeat Offense: Patanjali assured the court that it would not repeat such misleading advertisements in the future.
2. Scientific Research: The company emphasized that its Ayurvedic products were backed by scientific research and clinical studies.
3. Holistic Approach: Patanjali’s goal is to promote a better and healthier life for every citizen, thereby reducing the country’s healthcare infrastructure burden.

Court’s Response

The Supreme Court had previously warned Patanjali about false claims made in its advertisements. In 2023, the court threatened to impose hefty fines for each false claim. Despite this warning, misleading ads continued to appear. Consequently, the court issued contempt notices to the company and Acharya Balkrishna.

Conclusion

Patanjali’s unqualified apology signifies a step toward rectifying the situation. As the company reevaluates its advertising practices, it remains committed to promoting Ayurveda while adhering to the rule of law. The case serves as a reminder that transparency, scientific evidence, and responsible advertising are essential in the healthcare industry.