Yoga guru Ramdev and his aide Balkrishna published a fresh public apology in newspapers on April 24, a day after the Supreme Court pulled up the duo and their Patanjali Ayurved Limited for misleading ads.
Ramdev, who is the promoter of Patanjali Ayurved, and Balkrishna, the managing director, had put out a public apology on April 23 as well but the court asked if it was a big as the advertisements the company published while making claims about its products ability to cure illnesses.
New Public Apology published by Patanjali Ayurved, Acharya Balkrishna and Swami Ramdev in relation to the contempt case in #SupremeCourt over misleading ads.Yesterday, SC had asked if their earlier public apology was as big as their advertisements.https://t.co/DIjFpn2YZPpic.twitter.com/GziXsw9Px1
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) April 24, 2024
"We unconditionally extend the apology for holding meeting/press conference dated 22.11.2023. We earnestly apologize for the mistake made in publishing our advertisements and it is our whole- hearted commitment that such errors will not be repeated. We undertake to abide by directions and instructions of the Hon'ble Court with due care and utmost sincerity. We undertake to uphold the majesty of the court and comply with applicable laws and directions of the Hon'ble Court of law/relevant authorities. Sincerely, Patanjali Ayurved Limited, Acharya Balkrishna, Swami Ramdev, Haridwar, Uttarakhand," it said.
The previous day, the apology was in smaller font and size and had omitted clear reference of Ramdev and Balkrishna.
During the April 23 hearing, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah's bench asked if the apology had been widely publicised. "Is your apology the same size as your advertisement?" the court asked.
Ramdev and Balkrishna have been called to appear in court for the next hearing, which is scheduled for April 30.
The court will now hear the case on April 30 and directed the company to keep the paper cuttings of the ads so that it could see the actual size of the ads and not enlarged images.
The court initiated contempt proceedings against the duo and Patanjali for publishing advertisements of products in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 and its Rules.
They went ahead with the advertisements even after promising the court that they would not make claims of curing illnesses through their products and drugs.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
