SC Asks Ramdev to File Complaint Complainants in Favour of  Motion to Halt Criminal Investigations

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 22nd April. Yoga guru Ramdev was urged to petition for a stay of criminal proceedings by the Supreme Court on Friday. The complainants had filed cases against him due to his purported remarks opposing the use of allopathic drugs during the Covid outbreak.
The Indian Medical Association (IMA) chapters in Patna and Raipur filed complaints in 2021, claiming that Ramdev’s comments would undermine the Covid control mechanism and discourage people from seeking appropriate medical attention.

While considering Ramdev’s request for a stay of the criminal proceedings, a bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale stated that he must plead the complainants in order to obtain relief in the case.

The bench gave Ramdev permission to question the complainants and scheduled a hearing for after the apex court’s summer break, which begins on May 20.
The government of Bihar’s attorney stated that he required more time to prepare a response to the case.
Ramdev has named the Centre, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and IMA as parties in his case. On October 9, of last year, they received a notice from the highest court.

 Controversy on Ahsanuddin Amanullah’s oral comment, “we will rip you apart,”

During the Supreme Court’s recent hearing of the Patanjali contempt case, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah’s oral comment, “we will rip you apart,” directed at the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (Ayurveda and Unani Services), has incited hate speech online.

The State licensing authority’s incapacity to investigate the advertisements of Ayurvedic medicines manufactured by Divya Pharmacy, a company founded by yoga guru Baba Ramdev and his close associate Acharya Balkrishna, who are both facing contempt proceedings, was addressed by the Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Amanullah on April 10.

 The definition of “rip apart” in dictionary terms is “to completely destroy something by tearing it into pieces.” an actual physical act. It can also indicate “to criticize in an extremely harsh or irate manner.” As part of its constitutional role as the diligent custodian of people’ fundamental rights, the Supreme Court frequently witnesses the phenomenon of criticism from the bench.

Oral remark by Supreme Court judge triggers online vitriol against him – https://t.co/WmNOJXIeSG, For the best experience read this on The Hindu App. https://t.co/DH5d5FZWhr

— Krishnadas Rajagopal (@kdrajagopal) April 13, 2024

Several more derogatory terms had been used by the two judges against the author, such as “deep sleep,” “twiddling your thumbs,” “shoving files,” “derelict of duty,” and, at the end, “do you want us to fall on your officers like a ton of bricks.”

Why a vitriolic attack was directed exclusively at a portion of Justice Amanullah’s oral observations is unknown.

The court’s majesty and its sworn objective to uphold the citizens’ rights cannot be taken lightly, as the judges had made plain. The court displayed a great deal of restraint toward the authority at the conclusion of the hearing. In the interest of natural justice, it had declined to serve the State body with a contempt notice, allowing it the chance to provide a thorough affidavit outlining its position. Arun Mishra (retd.) stated in 2019 that disparaging a judge was the same as disparaging the Supreme Court.

A case flashback

In the contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved for its “misleading advertisements,” the Supreme Court on Tuesday gave Balkrishna, the managing director of the firm, and Ramdev, the co-founder, yoga guru, one final chance to submit affidavits of compliance. PTI reported.

The corporation was also criticized by a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah for the affidavit that Balkrishna submitted on March 20, which expressed regret for the advertisements’ release and described it as a “gross violation of the undertaking given to the top court,” according to Bar and Bench.

Balkrishna submitted an “unqualified apology” on March 20 and expressed his utmost respect for the rule of law. He also promised Patanjali Ayurved that it would make sure no such commercials were released in the future.

According to Bar and Bench, he further stated that the company’s media wing was ignorant of the Supreme Court’s ruling prohibiting the airing of similar commercials.

In the lawsuit, Patanjali Ayurved was accused of conducting a “smear campaign” against modern medicine and the Covid-19 immunization campaign by the petitioner, the Indian Medical Association.

The apology was given the day after Ramdev and Balkrishna were summoned to personally appear before the supreme court. Following the yoga guru’s failure to reply to a show cause notice in relation to contempt proceedings brought against his company, the court issued the order.

Both of them obliged with the bench’s request to appear in the court

The bench rejected their affidavit of apologies in the court. The bench stated, “You have to make sure that your solemn undertaking should have been followed.”  The bench went on, calling the apology affidavit “lip service” and adding, “We can say that we do not wish to accept that the media department does not know about what is happening in this court and it is an island.”

The bench declared that all national court orders must be complied with. “This is complete disobedience,” it continued.

In addition, Ramdev’s senior attorney, Balbir Singh, requested that the court accept the yoga guru’s apologies. Singh declared, “We are offering an unconditional apology.” “He is personally present to offer his apology.”

The bench criticized the yoga guru for having a press conference on the issue and stated that Ramdev’s apology ought to be included in a written document.

The judge said, “We need an affidavit and if so, you cannot just fly it under our nose.” “Take this disrespect to heart. It is clear from your quick decision to call a news conference within a day that you were aware of the procedures before breaking them.

The Ayurvedic, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, and Homeopathic Ministry was also questioned by the bench for its decision “to keep its eyes shut when Patanjali was going to town saying there [was] no remedy for Covid in allopathy.” The matter was subsequently scheduled for April 10 and the company was instructed to file the affidavits within a week. Balkrishna and Ramdev were both ordered by the bench to be present on the scheduled date.

What was the case?
Notices of contempt of court were served to Patanjali Ayurved and Balkrishna on February 27 for their continued publication of “misleading advertisements” about the company’s alleged medicinal cures. This was done in spite of the company’s November promises to the Supreme Court to cease advertising such products.

For the time being, the Drugs and Magic Remedies Objectionable Advertisements Act prohibits Patanjali Ayurved from promoting any of its products that are intended to treat the ailments and conditions mentioned on the list.

In February, the court had also issued a warning to the corporation not to criticize any medical system.

Following the publication of a half-page Patanjali advertisement that read, “Misconceptions spread by allopathy,” in many newspapers on July 10, 2022, a number of state units of the Indian Medical Association filed complaints against Ramdev and Patanjali. Avoid being misled by the pharmaceutical and medical industries and protect both the nation and yourself from them.

The Indian Medical Association requested that the Central Consumer Protection Authority of India, the Advertising Standards Council of India, and the Center be ordered by the court to stop running anti-allopathy campaigns and commercials.

“All false and misleading advertisements of Patanjali Ayurveda have to stop immediately,” the court had declared in November.

In 2021, senior counsel Siddharth Dave, representing Ramdev, had stated that the yoga guru did not believe in allopathic medications. This declaration caused some doctors to take offense and file multiple cases against the yoga guru.

Ramdev has requested a stay of the criminal complaint inquiry as a temporary remedy.
In response to Ramdev’s comments criticizing the use of allopathic medications during the pandemic, the IMA has filed objections in Bihar and Chhattisgarh.

The Indian Penal Code and the Disaster Management Act of 2005 have several clauses that the yoga guru has been booked under.  Ramdev, whose words sparked a national discussion on allopathy versus ayurveda, later withdrew them in response to a letter from Harsh Vardhan, the then-union health minister, who deemed them “inappropriate”.
Meanwhile, the Delhi Medical Association (DMA) has requested permission to enter the case on the grounds that Ramdev disparaged allopathy and “instigated” individuals to disobey treatment recommendations and vaccination schedules.

The DMA, which has 15,000 doctors as members, asserts that Ramdev’s Patanjali made over Rs 1,000 crore in revenue from the sale of Coronil kits that were not authorized by the appropriate body.