The Supreme Court has closed the Indian Medical Association’s petition against misleading claims in traditional medicine advertisements, a case that began with Patanjali Ayurveda’s disparaging ads targeting modern medicine.
The apex court has also vacated its earlier stay on the Centre’s notification that removed the requirement for State approval before publishing Ayurvedic, Siddha and Unani medicine ads.
As per media reports, the matter started after Patanjali ran ads claiming cures and undermining allopathy, prompting the Court to impose a temporary ban on such promotions and initiate contempt proceedings against its promoters Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna. Patanjali has since issued multiple apologies, leading to the closure of contempt proceedings. Over months of hearings, the scope widened to address misleading medical ads more broadly, as well as unethical practices in both traditional and modern medicine.
The Ministry of AYUSH had, in July 2024, omitted Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, a provision meant to curb exaggerated or false claims in traditional medicine promotions by mandating prior State-level vetting. In August 2024, the Supreme Court had stayed this notification, keeping Rule 170 in effect during the case.
The Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan has now observed that banning advertisements while allowing the manufacture of AYUSH drugs would amount to an unfair trade practice. It has noted that the reliefs originally sought in the IMA’s petition have already been achieved and that the judiciary does not have the power to reinstate a provision once omitted by the Centre. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta has told the court that a robust legal and self-regulatory framework already exists to prohibit misleading medical claims, making Rule 170 unnecessary.
With the case disposed of, the interim order from August 2024 has been vacated, allowing AYUSH drug advertisements to now follow the same norms as allopathic medicines, without mandatory State-level pre-approval.
