On February 10th, the Supreme Court criticized Delhi, Andhra Pradesh, and Jammu & Kashmir for not addressing illegal advertisements of Ayurvedic and Unani drugs. The Court summoned their chief secretaries for explanations due to non-compliance with prior orders. Emphasizing enforcement of Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, it aims to curb deceptive promotions.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday (Feb 10th) took a strong stance against several states, including Delhi, Andhra Pradesh, and Jammu & Kashmir, for failing to act against illegal advertisements promoting Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani drugs. The Court directed the chief secretaries of these states to appear via video conferencing and explain the lack of action.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan expressed displeasure over the non-implementation of its previous orders, stating that hardly any effective action had been taken.
Senior advocate Shadan Farasat, acting as amicus curiae, pointed out that most states simply accepted apologies and took undertakings from violators while acquitting them, instead of enforcing stricter penalties.
The bench emphasized the importance of enforcing Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, which regulates the advertising of Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani drugs. The Court stated:
“As rightly submitted by the amicus curiae, the issue of illegal advertisements of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drugs will be substantially taken care of if all the states start implementing Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, in its true letter and spirit. Notwithstanding several orders passed by this Court, the states are non-compliant.”
Given the continued violation and lack of enforcement, the Court has summoned the chief secretaries of Delhi, Andhra Pradesh, and J&K to explain their failure to act against misleading advertisements in the traditional medicine sector.
The matter is set for further hearing, with the Supreme Court closely monitoring state compliance to curb false claims and misleading drug promotions.
Case Title – Indian Medical Association v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 645/2022
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE