The Supreme Court closed the IMA petition.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court discontinued the Indian Medical Association (IMA) petition seeking action against misleading advertisements of Ayurveda and other alternative medical practices. The court said that the relief sought in the petition has already been received, so there is no need to take this matter forward. Along with this, the court also removed the interim ban imposed on the removal of Rule 170 and allowed the parties to go to the High Court.
Justice B.V. Nagratna and Justice K.V. Starting a hearing on the matter, Vishwanathan’s bench said, ‘All the relief sought in the petition has already been fulfilled. Now this matter should be closed. The lawyer appearing for IMA argued that Ayurveda’s advertisements claim to treat serious diseases such as cancer, which deviates patients and as long as they reach the allopathy doctor, the disease has become serious. On this, Justice Nagratna said, “As long as these medicines are allowed, we cannot say that they are not sold.” Justice Vishwanathan also said that a complete ban on advertisements can be inappropriate trade behavior.
‘Do not reduce the understanding of the common man’
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that there is a legal system for such complaints. A lawyer expressed concern citing the country’s large illiterate population, which Mehta commented, ‘This is not Jantar Mantar, where anyone comes and says anything. Do not reduce the understanding of the common man. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that he is just one platform and platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp should not be dragged into unnecessary cases. On this, the court clarified that the parties can go to the High Court on any issue related to the removal of Rule 170.
What was Rule 170? What happened before in this case?
Rule 170 was part of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Offensive Advertising) Act, 1954, which controlled misleading advertisements. The rule was removed by the Ministry of AYUSH on 1 July 2024, but the Supreme Court on 27 August 2024 imposed an interim ban on it. Now the court has lifted this ban. The Supreme Court had already taken many stringent steps in this case. In February 2024, the court sought a response from Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Puducherry and Punjab on the following situation of Rule 170.
The court had questioned Jharkhand whether advertisements that violate Rule 170 (2) are being published here. The court had warned the states that contempt action could be taken if the rules are not followed. On 10 February, the court sought a response from Andhra Pradesh, Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir on non-transportation. On 15 January, the court gave strict instructions to the states and union territories to prevent misleading advertisements.
There was a dispute between Patanjali and IMA
There was a long dispute between Patanjali Ayurved and IMA in this case. In August 2024, the Supreme Court, the then Chairman of IMA, Dr. R.V. A contempt notice was heard against Ashokan. The court asked him to apologize for his comments, but in May, the court did not accept his apology. However, later in August 2024, the court accepted the unconditional apology of Baba Ramdev and Patanjali’s managing director Acharya Balakrishna and stopped the contempt proceedings.
New rule for advertising industry
Following the directions of the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting launched a new portal on 4 June 2024, where it is mandatory for advertisers to submit a ‘self-declaration certificate’ for TV, radio, print and digital advertisements. The Supreme Court clarified that no more consideration is needed in this case. The court gave all the parties freedom to go to the High Court and removed the interim ban. This decision is considered an important step towards maintaining balance between Ayurveda and allopathy.
Latest india news
