 "'Can't sit on a couch and say anything': Supreme Court raps IMA president")
The Supreme Court on Tuesday slammed the President of the Indian Medical Association (IMA) for his comments, made during an interview, emphasising the need for self-restraint even while upholding freedom of speech.
Dr RV Asokan, the President of IMA, drew sharp criticism from the Supreme Court for his remarks concerning the court's ruling in a case involving misleading advertisements by Patanjali Ayurved, founded by Ramdev and his aide Balkrishna.
Speaking to a news agency, Asokan expressed disappointment over the Supreme Court's scrutiny of IMA's practices and those of private doctors. He criticised the court's stance, labelling it as a sweeping judgement unsuitable for its stature.
"It is unfortunate that the court has criticised private practitioners based on unclear statements, which has demoralised them," he said.
Notably, IMA is the petitioner in the case against Patanjali for allegedly misleading claims about its products.
Pulling up Asokan during today's proceedings, the bench comprising Justice Hima Kohli and Justice A Amanullah expressed disappointment, stating, "We would have expected more sense of responsibility from you... you can't vent your feelings against the court in the press like this. What made you suddenly go like this?"
More From This Section
In response, Asokan tendered an unconditional apology. However, Justice Kohli questioned the sincerity of his apology, saying, "Whether we should accept your statements after such damaging statements, you are the one who dragged the other side to the court, saying they are denigrating you, but when you are put to test...?"
The court further criticised the inadequacy of Asokan's affidavit, questioning the absence of a public apology. "Everything was written in black and white, why did you not make amends if you truly wanted to apologise? What did you do to redeem yourself after the interview? Tell us," the court said.
"We are the first ones to uphold the freedom of free speech. But there are times when there should be self-restraint. As IMA President, you should have had self-restraint. That's the point! We didn't see that in your interviews," Justice Kohli said.
Justice Amanullah echoed this sentiment, highlighting the judiciary's measured response to criticism. "Asokan, you are also a citizen of this country. The amount of criticism judges face, why don't they react? Because personally we don't have much of an ego, we are magnanimous. We are entitled to take action, but very rarely we do," he added.
The court emphasised the importance of discretion and responsibility in public discourse, cautioning against reckless commentary. "But that does not mean you go to town with this kind of comment. You cannot just sit on a couch and say anything about the court. What would you have done if the other side made these kinds of comments! You would have come running to this Court," it said.
The court added that it is not convinced by the affidavit submitted by the IMA president, describing it as "too little, too late".
Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, representing Asokan, urged the court for relief. However, Justice Kohli said, "What is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander ... You can't say anything and everything and then meekly say he fell in error. Are you saying he fell into some trap?"
In recent weeks, the Patanjali case has witnessed a shift in dynamics, with Ramdev and Balkrishna facing censure for misleading advertisements. Despite multiple apologies being rejected, Asokan's interview has drawn attention to the petitioner's conduct, prompting the court's intervention. The case is scheduled for the next hearing on July 9.