Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

14 Patanajali products that have been suspended

Tuesday, April 2: Exaggerated claims of unbelievable results with the use of consumer products are not new in the Indian advertisement industry. But, the law of the land does explicitly prohibit and punish misleading advertisements from time to time. One such case is grabbing headlines of late. <keyword id="20083249" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="baba-ramdev" source="keywords">Baba Ramdev</keyword> and <keyword id="20752072" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="acharya-balkrishna" source="keywords">Acharya Balkrishna</keyword>, co-founder and managing director of <keyword id="19980518" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="patanjali" source="keywords">Patanjali</keyword>, respectively, appeared before the <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> today for a hearing regarding a case involving misleading advertisements. So, what exactly happened? <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="A case of false and misleading advertisements" comment="subhead" text="A case of false and misleading advertisements">A case of false and misleading advertisements</cmsannotation> The case began in November last year when the Supreme Court, responding to a petition by the Indian Medical Association (IMA), cautioned <keyword id="6406649" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="patanjali-ayurved" source="Orion">Patanjali Ayurved</keyword> against airing "false" and "misleading" claims in its advertisements about medicinal products. The IMA cited several ads that allegedly portrayed allopathic medicine and doctors negatively, claiming that companies producing ayurvedic medicines made disparaging remarks to deceive the public. Despite the Supreme Court's cautionary stance and prohibition on advertising products claiming to treat specific ailments under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, Ramdev and Balkrishna reportedly conducted a press conference, once again making misleading claims about Patanjali's ability to cure various conditions permanently. Subsequently, on February 27, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with Patanjali's continuous dissemination of false advertisements regarding medicinal cures and issued notices to the company, questioning why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. It also chastised the government for not taking action and “sitting with their eyes shut”. On March 21, the Court summoned Baba Ramdev and Balkrishna to personally appear before it on April 2 to address their failure to respond to the contempt notice regarding misleading advertisements about medicinal cures. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="What’s the latest update?" comment="subhead" text="What’s the latest update?">What’s the latest update?</cmsannotation> In today's hearing, the Supreme Court criticised Ramdev and Balkrishna for their "absolute defiance" in failing to submit proper affidavits of compliance and for disregarding legal directives. The Court also rebuked Patanjali's MD for describing the Drugs and Cosmetics (Magic Remedies) Act as "archaic". Noting that Patanjali's advertisements are in the "teeth of law" of the land, the Court warned Ramdev to prepare for potential consequences. Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, presiding over the bench, declined to acknowledge the apology extended by Patanjali last month. Subsequently, Ramdev's attorney, reportedly with folded hands, reiterated that both Ramdev and Balakrishna were extending a personal and unconditional apology before the court. Finally, the Court has granted Ramdev and Balkrishna a final opportunity to file affidavits in one week and mandated their presence at the next hearing on April 10.

Government ‘sitting with its eyes shut’, says Supreme Court as Patanjali’s misleading advertisement case drags on

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword>, on Tuesday, granted one-week time to yoga guru <keyword id="20055079" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Ramdev" source="keywords">Ramdev</keyword>, his aide <keyword id="21172332" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Balkrishna" source="keywords">Balkrishna</keyword> and <keyword id="20083247" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Patanjali-Ayurved" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Patanjali Ayurved" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Patanjali Ayurved">Patanjali Ayurved</keyword> to issue a <keyword id="114576" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="public-apology" source="Orion">public apology</keyword> in the misleading advertisements case, but said it was not letting them "<keyword id="2308348" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="off-the-hook" source="Orion">off the hook</keyword>" now. Both Ramdev and Balkrishna were present during the hearing and personally tendered an unqualified apology to the apex court. A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah took note of their apologies, but made it clear that at this stage it has not decided to "let them off the hook". "You are doing good work but you can't degrade allopathy," the bench told Balkrishna while interacting with him. Ramdev, who also interacted with the bench, said he had no intention to show disrespect to the court in any manner. However, the bench told Balkrishna that they (<keyword id="6356684" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="patanjali" source="Orion">Patanjali</keyword>) are not so innocent that they didn't know what the top court had said in its earlier orders in the case. "I am willing to give a public apology," senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna, told the bench at the outset. The apex court asked Ramdev and Balkrishna, both of whom were present in the court, to come forward for an interaction with the bench. "They should feel they have a connect with the court," the bench said. The apex court has now posted the matter for further hearing on April 23. Ramdev and Balkrishna had last week tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" before the top court over advertisements issued by the firm making tall claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products. In two separate affidavits filed in the court, Ramdev and Balkrishna have tendered an unqualified apology for the "breach of the statement" recorded in the November 21 last year order of the apex court. In the November 21, 2023 order, the top court had noted that counsel representing Patanjali Ayurved had assured it that "henceforth there shall not be any violation of any law(s), especially relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it and, further, that no casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine will be released to the media in any form". The top court had said Patanjali Ayurved Ltd is "bound down to such assurance". The non-observance of the specific assurance and the subsequent media statements irked the apex court, which later issued a notice to them to explain why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them.

Patanjali ads case: Supreme Court asks Ramdev, Balkrishna to issue public apology; says not letting them off hook yet

Expanding the scope of its hearing in the <keyword id="19980518" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Patanjali" source="keywords">Patanjali</keyword> Ayurved case, the <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Supreme Court" meta.hostid="266" meta.entityid="Supreme Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Tuesday took a stern view of <keyword id="20610549" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="misleading-advertisements" source="keywords">misleading advertisements</keyword> by FMCG firms and asked three Union ministries to inform it about the steps they have taken to curb the practice which takes "public for a ride" and adversely affects their health. The court passed the order after Yoga guru Ramdev and his aide Balkrishna of Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. told a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah that they have issued unqualified public apology in as many as 67 newspapers over misleading advertisements and are willing to issue additional advertisements expressing their contrition. The bench said the public apology published in newspapers were not on record and asked those to be filed within two days. It posted the matter for April 30 for further consideration. While hearing the Patanjali case, the apex court said the implementation of the relevant provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Consumer Protection Act and the related rules also needed a closer examination. It said the issue was not limited to Patanjali but extended to all Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) firms which have been issuing "misleading advertisements and taking the public for a ride, in particular affecting the health of babies, school-going children and senior citizens who have been consuming products on the basis of the said misrepresentation". "We must clarify that we are not here to gun for a particular party or a particular agency or a particular authority. This is a PIL, and in the larger interest of the consumers, public should know which way they are going and how and why they can be misled, and how authorities are acting to prevent it," the bench said. The court asked the Union ministries of consumer affairs, information and broadcasting, and information technology to explain what action they have taken to prevent the misuse of consumer laws. It also sought an explanation from the Centre over an August 2023 letter issued by the Ministry of Ayush to the licencing authorities of all states and Union Territories and drug controllers of Ayush asking them to not initiate any action under rule 170 of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. The bench also asked the <keyword id="20083252" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Indian-Medical-Association" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Indian Medical Association" meta.hostid="266" meta.entityid="Indian Medical Association">Indian Medical Association</keyword> (IMA), the petitioner in the Patanjali advertisements case, to "put its house in order". It said several complaints have been made about alleged unethical acts by members of the IMA who prescribe highly expensive medicines and line of treatment. The bench also ordered impleading the National Medical Commission (NMC) as a respondent in the matter for effective assistance to the court. At the outset, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd managing director Balkrishna, told the bench they have issued on Monday unqualified apology for the "lapses" on their part. "Where? Why it is not filed?" the bench asked. Rohatgi said it was issued on Monday in 67 newspapers across the country. When the court asked the senior advocate why did the respondents wait for a whole week before publishing the public apology, Rohatgi said, "Its language had to be changed". The court also quizzed him about the size of advertisements. "Is it the same size of advertisements that you normally issue in newspapers?" it asked Rohatgi, who submitted "It costs tens of lakhs (of rupees)". The bench ordered that the apology published be filed on record and added it wanted to see the actual advertisement published in newspapers. "The said advertisements are not on record. It is submitted that the same have been collated and shall be filed in the course of the day with copies to counsel for the parties. Needful shall be done within two days with copies to counsel for the parties," it said. The counsel said additional advertisement shall be issued by Ramdev and Balkrishna tendering unqualified apology for the lapses on their part. The bench said it was necessary to implead the three central ministries in order to examine the steps taken to prevent the abuse of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act and rules, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Consumer Protection Act. It said these ministries shall file affidavits enunciating the action they have taken to prevent the misuse/abuse of these statutes along with the relevant data since 2018. The bench said licencing authorities of all states and UTs shall also be impleaded as co-respondents in the matter. The bench told the IMA's counsel that while they are pointing fingers at Patanjali, "the other four fingers are also pointing at you (IMA)". On April 16, the apex court had warned Ramdev and Balkrishna against any attempt to "degrade allopathy" and permitted them to tender a "public apology and show contrition" within a week in the contempt proceedings in the misleading advertisements case against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. The apex court is hearing a plea filed in 2022 by the IMA alleging a smear campaign against the Covid vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine. Ramdev and Balkrishna had earlier tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" before the top court over advertisements issued by the firm making tall claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products. SEE ALSO:<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/google-pixel-8a-may-be-more-expensive-than-its-predecessor-as-per-a-new-leak/articleshow/109499394.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/google-pixel-8a-may-be-more-expensive-than-its-predecessor-as-per-a-new-leak/articleshow/109499394.cms" target="_blank">Google Pixel 8a may be more expensive than its predecessor, as per a new leak</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/webstories/best-smartphones-under-25000-in-india/slidelist/109529634.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/webstories/best-smartphones-under-25000-in-india/slidelist/109529634.cms" target="_blank">Best smartphones under ₹25,000 in India</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/sports/webstories/at-17-indian-chess-prodigy-d-gukesh-becomes-youngest-challenger-for-world-championship/slidelist/109492021.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/sports/webstories/at-17-indian-chess-prodigy-d-gukesh-becomes-youngest-challenger-for-world-championship/slidelist/109492021.cms" target="_blank">At 17, Indian chess prodigy D Gukesh becomes youngest challenger for World Championship</a>

Supreme Court expands Patanjali misleading ads hearing to include FMCG companies

The promoters of <keyword id="6595587" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="patanjali-foods" source="Orion">Patanjali Foods</keyword> on Thursday said they do not foresee any adverse or negative impact on the financial position of the company owing to the instant freeze of promoters' shareholding by the stock exchanges. Earlier, the stock exchanges had put a freeze on the shares owned by the promoters for not meeting the minimum public shareholding (MPS) requirements as specified in the <keyword id="175952" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="securities-contracts" source="Orion">Securities Contracts</keyword> (<keyword id="6354397" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="scr" source="Orion">SCR</keyword>) (Regulation) Rules, 1957, of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). According to a statement of the company, shares were already under lock-in as per SEBI guidelines till April 2023 (one year from the date of listing i.e. April 08, 2023), and instant actions of stock exchanges do not appear to have a negative impact on the functioning of the Company. As per SCR Rules where as a result of the implementation of the resolution plan approved, public shareholding in a listed company falls below 10 per cent then the same shall be increased to at least 10 per cent within a maximum period of twelve months from the date of such fall. In December 2017, the National Company Law Tribunal initiated insolvency proceedings against Patanjali Foods, earlier known as <keyword id="53343" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="ruchi-soya" source="Orion">Ruchi Soya</keyword> Industries. And in July 2019, the tribunal approved the resolution plan submitted by <keyword id="6406649" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="patanjali-ayurved" source="Orion">Patanjali Ayurved</keyword> for Ruchi Soya. Owing to the allotment of the equity shares made pursuant to the implementation of the resolution plan as duly approved by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the aggregate shareholding of the promoter and promoter group of the company increased to 98.87 per cent of the total issued, paid up and subscribed equity share capital of the Company. The company was acquired by Patanjali Group pursuant to the approval of the resolution plan submitted by a consortium led by Patanjali Ayurved by NCLT vide its order dated July 24, 2019, read with order dated September 4, 2019, and the same was implemented with effect from December 18, 2019. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/vedanta-appoints-omar-davis-as-its-president-strategy/articleshow/98690407.cms">Vedanta appoints Omar Davis as its President-Strategy</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/news/global-uncertainty-rising-need-to-maintain-margins-of-safety-chief-economic-advisor/articleshow/98690709.cms">Global uncertainty rising, need to maintain 'margins of safety': Chief Economic Advisor</a>

Patanjali's promoters say shareholding freeze won't impact company's financial position

Diversified FMCG company <keyword id="181951" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="ruchi-soya-industries" source="Orion">Ruchi Soya Industries</keyword> has raised ₹1,290 crore from anchor investors ahead of its follow-on public offering (<keyword id="46435" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="fpo" source="Orion">FPO</keyword>) that opens for public subscription on Thursday. A follow-on offering is the issuance of additional shares made by a company after an initial public offering (IPO). The upcoming FPO is going to be only a fresh issuance of equity shares to public investors without any offer for sale component, a statement said on Wednesday. The company informed the exchanges that the price band for its FPO has been set at ₹615 per equity share (at the lower end of the price-band) to ₹650 per equity share (at the higher end of the price-band). On Wednesday, it informed the bourses that 19,843,153 equity shares have been allocated to anchor investors at the upper-end of the price-band against the applications from various anchor investors. Societe Generale, BNP Paribas, The Sultanate of Oman - Ministry of Defence Pension Fund, Yas Takaful PJSC (an Abu Dhabi-based insurance company), MK Cohesion, UPS Group and Alchemy were among the foreign investors that received allocation under the anchor investor portion of the FPO, the statement said. Currently, <keyword id="3040166" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="patanjali-group" source="Orion">Patanjali Group</keyword> owns about 98.9 per cent stake in <keyword id="53343" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="ruchi-soya" source="Orion">Ruchi Soya</keyword>, while public shareholders own about 1.1 per cent stake. Post the FPO, Patanjali Group's holding in Ruchi Soya will come down to about 81 per cent, and the public shareholders would hold about 19 per cent. The entire proceeds from the follow-on issue will be used for furthering the company's business by repayment of certain outstanding loans, meeting its incremental working capital requirements and other general corporate purposes, the company had said recently while announcing the FPO. Ruchi Soya's <keyword id="705161" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="ruchi-gold" source="Orion">Ruchi Gold</keyword> brand is the market leader in branded palm oil and also the pioneer of soya foods in India under the brand name Nutrela. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/whatsapp-multi-device-support-starts-rolling-out-to-all-users/articleshow/90410868.cms">WhatsApp multi-device support starts rolling out to all users</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/health/news/omicron-subvariant-infections-on-rise-in-us-accounts-for-over-34-of-the-new-covid-19-infections/articleshow/90410070.cms">Omicron subvariant infections on rise in US, accounts for over 34% of the new COVID-19 infections</a>

You Searched For "patanjali" and got 6 results

14 Patanajali products that have been suspended

Ashmita Gupta

Government ‘sitting with its eyes shut’, says Supreme Court as Patanjali’s misleading advertisement case drags on

Kunal Kambli

Patanjali ads case: Supreme Court asks Ramdev, Balkrishna to issue public apology; says not letting them off hook yet

PTI

Supreme Court expands Patanjali misleading ads hearing to include FMCG companies

PTI

Patanjali's promoters say shareholding freeze won't impact company's financial position

ANI

Ruchi Soya raises ₹1,290 crore from anchor investors ahead of FPO

IANS

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides