Supreme Court fines intervention applicant Rs.10,000 for proxy litigation in Patanjali case, citing misleading ads and alleged quack doctor’s role in mother’s demise. Court dismisses application, warning against attempt to manipulate.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Recently, The Supreme Court has directed an intervention applicant to pay a fine of Rs.10,000 after requesting to join as a co-petitioner with the Indian Medical Association (IMA) in its Writ Petition against Patanjali Ayurved.
The applicant claimed that Patanjali Ayurved had spread misleading advertisements and contended that a person posing as an allopathic doctor, whose treatment allegedly led to the death of the applicant’s mother in 2019, should be held responsible. However, the Court dismissed the application.
During the hearing, the person intervening clarified that the individual mentioned in their application was referred to as a doctor based on the individual’s own claim, despite lacking the necessary qualifications. Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah addressed the Intervention Application before proceeding with the main case against Patanjali.
ALSO READ: BREAKING|| Baba Ramdev | “We Are Not Blind, Apology Rejected”: SC In Patanjali Ads Case
Ultimately, the Court dismissed the apology affidavit submitted by Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, prominent figures associated with Patanjali Ayurved. Notably, the Court expressed strong dissatisfaction with the alleged inaction of the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority regarding Patanjali and issued a stern warning, stating, “we will rip you apart.”
Justice Kohli initially questioned the counsel representing the intervention applicant about the purpose and grounds of the application. The counsel responded by stating that the application sought impleadment as a petitioner. Justice Amanullah interjected, affirming that the applicant’s mother had received treatment from an allopathic doctor. However, the counsel clarified that the person in question was a quack without appropriate qualifications.
Justice Kohli expressed reservations about the intervention applicant’s choice to file the petition directly in the Supreme Court. She queried why the issue had not been brought before a lower court and accused the applicant of exploiting the petition for publicity. Justice Amanullah echoed these concerns, indicating that it seemed to be a case of proxy litigation initiated by the applicant, with claims against the alleged allopathic doctor.
The counsel elaborated that the individual in question held a PhD, not qualifications as an allopathic doctor. Despite this clarification, the Court dismissed the application, considering it “completely baseless,” and imposed a fine of Rs.10,000 on the intervention applicant.
Following this, the lawyer requested authorization to retract the application, highlighting the seriousness of the matter. Justice Kohli questioned the timeline of the mother’s demise and expressed surprise that no legal action had been pursued for five years.
The counsel explained that a criminal complaint and an FIR had been filed, emphasizing their commitment to pursuing the case through various forums.
ALSO READ: Patanjali ads: Ramdev, Balkrishna tender unconditional apology before SC
BACKGROUND
Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, representing Patanjali Ayurved, faced criticism at the Supreme Court over accusations of misleading advertisements for their medicinal products. Despite offering an unconditional apology, the court deemed their actions as wilful and deliberate violations. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) had filed a plea seeking stringent measures against Patanjali for allegedly making illegal claims in its advertisements.
READ PREVIOUS REPORTS BABA RAMDEV
CASE TITLE:
Indian Medical Association v. Union Of India
