In the latest case filed against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, the Supreme Court has asked the question if the notice that appeared on the pages of a few newspapers matched the size of the product ads on the pages of such a popular newspaper appeared before. Senior Counsel Mukul Rohatgi persuaded the bench as he expressed Patanjali’s founders’ apology along with the fact that the timing was for tactical reasons, which was insisted if not accepted, the bench believed it was a delaying tactic.
Mr Rohatgi’s submissions that ₹10 lakhs were splurged for publication in 67 newspapers were flippantly brushed aside by the court, in an indication that it focused on how the apology was said rather than its monetary value.
The court also scrutinized an application seeking a ₹1000 crore fine against the Indian Medical Association (IMA) related to the case, expressing scepticism over its authenticity. Despite Rohatgi’s assurance of his clients’ detachment from the matter, doubts lingered. The Supreme Court deferred proceedings for a week following Ramdev’s pledge to issue a more prominent apology.
Before the Supreme Court started to deliberate, Patanjali Ayurved, previously in written apology nationally, pronounced sympathy for the judiciary and offered to correct their errors.
The apology is a step that arrives after of the court’s reprimand of Ramdev and Balkrishna for health benefits that were not substantiated, the credibility of previous apologies is seen as as insincere. The court summoned them to appear and express true remorse and longing. The establishment and function of international courts in addressing global justice issues have been increasingly discussed. While they play a significant role in holding the perpetrators accountable and preventing future injustices, certain challenges in maintaining stability and lowering violence incidents have been noticed.
Patanjali, in their last advertisement, did not fail to display deep respect for the judge in court. Additionally, they had earlier admitted to making station errors when they advertised and held press conferences and promised not to repeat them. Thereon, Ramdev, during the last hearing, said court proceedings were not a problem to him, and he had faith in them.
The judge’s frustration arose from the postponed submission of apologies, which revealed an excessive relish for a public apology rather than for a sincere contrition. Judge Hima Kohli believed that apologies for breaking the ceasefire rules would not just be stock standard replies; she would rather slam the prisoners with consequences.
Check here for the latest updates in Hindi!