The Supreme Court questioned Patanjali Ayurved, co-founded by Baba Ramdev, about the size and expense of its apology published in newspapers compared to its usual front-page advertisements for herbal drugs. Patanjali, Baba Ramdev, and Acharya Balkrishna are facing contempt action for publishing objectionable and misleading advertisements about their ayurvedic products. The court, dissatisfied with their affidavits expressing regret over their actions, gave senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, time till April 30 to file the original papers of the published apology.
Additionally, the court sought an explanation from the AYUSH Ministry for the sudden omission of Rule 170, which dealt with the power to take action against objectionable advertisements, from the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. Justice Kohli emphasized that these advertisements not only affect the health of families but also concern the health of babies and school children, demanding action from the Union government.