SC warns IMA...

The matter is set for a hearing on May 7, with the court granting Ramdev and Balkrishna exemption from personal appearance at the next hearing.

During the proceedings, the court expressed serious concerns over remarks by IMA President RV Asokan, which were highlighted by Patanjali’s representative, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi. Rohatgi, appearing for Patanjali, told the bench that he had come across a “very disturbing interview” given by the president of IMA on Monday.

“He (IMA president) says why has the court turned its fingers at us. The court is making vague and irrelevant statements. The court is taking a broadside at us. We have done a great job. Our people have died,” Rohatgi said.

“This will be more serious than what we have been doing now… So much water has flown and the proceeding has taken a turn. Be prepared for more serious consequences,” Justice Amanullah told the IMA’s counsel.

Justice Kohli added: “If it is correct what is said by the other side, then let us tell you, you have not covered yourself with glory.” Rohatgi, who referred to a news report of an English daily on IMA chief ’s interview, said he would file a copy of the publication carrying the interview. In an interview given to PTI on Monday, the IMA president had said it was “unfortunate” that the Supreme Court criticised IMA and also the practices of the private doctors.

The Supreme Court also criticised the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority (SLA) for its six-year delay in addressing misleading advertisements by Patanjali Ayurved Limited. The court emphasised the need for honesty from the SLA to garner any sympathy or compassion. The justices expressed their dissatisfaction with the SLA’s explanations and questioned the timing of its actions, which only followed the court’s order from April 10. The bench remarked on the SLA’s sudden shift from inaction to rapid response following the court’s intervention. The SLA’s affidavit outlined actions taken against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Divya Pharmacy post the April 10 order, claiming vigilance in its duties. However, the bench questioned this selfassessment, considering the prolonged period of inactivity.

“The long and short of it is, when you want to move, you move like lightning and if you don’t want to move, you drag your feet forever and ever. This is what it shows,” the bench observed after perusing the affidavit filed by the SLA.

The court also inquired about the measures taken by the former joint director of the SLA during his tenure, addressing the lack of action since 2018. Justice Amanullah emphasised the importance of honesty in seeking the court’s leniency.

Following the court’s wake-up call, the SLA suspended manufacturing licences for 14 Patanjali products and filed a criminal complaint against key