 "Misleading ads: Patanjali issues fresh apology. This time, more prominent")
Yoga guru Ramdev and Balkrishna, co-founders of Patanjali Ayurved Limited, published a fresh public apology in newspapers on Wednesday, April 24, a day after the Supreme Court's scrutiny during the misleading advertisement-related contempt case.
The size of the apology and, consequently, its visibility in the papers appears larger (nearly double in size) than the earlier apology, which was limited to just a notch above 70 words. This comes after the top court, on Tuesday, had questioned the size and visibility of the company's earlier apology concerning misleading advertisements.
"In wake of on going matter before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, we in our individual capacity as well as on behalf of the Company, unconditionally apologise for the non-compliance or disobedience of directions/orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India," the new "unconditional public apology" by Patanjali read.
"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," it added.
Ramdev and Balkrishna previously submitted an "unconditional and unqualified apology" to the Supreme Court regarding advertisements released by the company that made exaggerated claims about the healing properties of its products.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court rapped Patanjali Ayurved over their previous public apology and asked "Is the apology the same size as your advertisements?"
More From This Section
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the company, told the court that their public apology cost them 'tens of lakhs', and was published in 67 newspapers.
"Does it cost the same tens of lakhs of rupees for the full-page advertisements you published? We are wondering," Justice Kohli asked.
"Cut the actual newspaper clippings and keep them handy. For you to photocopy by enlarging, it may not impress us. We want to see the actual size of the ad. When you issue an apology, it does not mean that we have to see it by a microscope," Justice Kohli added.
Meanwhile, the top court also came down on the Indian Medical Association (IMA), which is the petitioner in the case, regarding complaints of unethical practices by allopathic doctors.
"While the petitioner is pointing fingers at the respondent, four other fingers are also pointing at you... We are of the opinion that the petitioner (IMA) also needs to put its house in order. There are several complaints that are made with regard to alleged unethical acts of members of the petitioner-Association who prescribe medicines to the patients in the line of treatment," the court said.
The Bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah adjourned the hearing until April 30 and asked Patanjali's lawyers to bring to them the copy of the apology advertisements.