The Supreme Court recently refused to accept the unconditional apology issued by Indian Medical Association (IMA) President R V Asokan in a newspaper for his “damaging” remarks about the apex court made during an interview.
The Court criticised Asokan regarding the publication of an apology in newspapers during the hearing of the Patanjali Ayurved misleading ads case. The Supreme Court’s two-judge bench, consisting of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta, noted that the font of the published apology was ‘miniscule’ and hence it is ‘not legible’.
The court has stayed the Ministry of Ayush’s July 1 notification that omitted Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. The Supreme Court ordered that Rule 170, which deals with prohibition of misleading advertisements of Ayurveda, Siddha, or Unani drugs, shall remain in effect until further notice.
The ministry has also been asked to review this matter and submit a response.
The SC bench also directed Asokan, on Tuesday, to submit physical copies of 20 editions of the newspaper, where his apology was published, within one week.
Senior advocate PS Patwalia, representing the IMA President, argued that the interview was never published in any press, emphasising that it was solely available online.
On July 9, Asokan informed the Supreme Court that his unconditional apology for the “damaging” remarks he made during an interview, in which he answered queries about Patanjali Ayurved’s misleading advertisements case, has been published across various publications.
