Kerala HC Stays Proceedings In Criminal Cases Against Patanjali, Its Founders Ramdev & Balkrishna Over Alleged False Ads

For context, the relevant portion of Section 3(d) of the Act is extracted below:

Prohibition of advertisement of certain drugs for treatment of certain diseases and disorders.—Subject to the provisions of this Act, no person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement referring to any drug in terms which suggest or are calculated to lead to the use of that drug for—

(d) the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of any disease, disorder or condition specified in the Schedule, or any other disease, disorder or condition (by whatsoever name called) which may be specified in the rules made under this Act:

Justice V.G Arun noted that cognizance was taken by the jurisdictional courts, Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kattappana, as summary trial cases on the basis of a complaint preferred by the Drugs Inspector, Kattapana. Similarly, in the other connected matters also, cases were registered as summary trial cases before the jurisdictional courts on the complaints of the respective Drugs Inspectors.

When the matter was taken up for consideration, the senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance in contradistinction to the procedure laid down in Direction No. (v) of the order of the Supreme Court in Indian Medical Association v. Union of India.

According to the direction, all complaints received through the Grievance Redressal Mechanism or or other means are to be forwarded to the officers concerned to take action under Section 8(1) of the Act and if the officers find that there is violation of the Act, a complaint has to be filed with the jurisdictional police station.

However, the Court also opined that detailed consideration is required in the matter and directed the public prosecutor to take instructions. Thereafter, it stayed the proceedings till the next posting date.

Earlier, in another case, the Kerala High Court had granted a stay of criminal proceedings against the petitioners in alleged case of publication of misleading medical advertisements.

Recently, the Uttarakhand High Court had quashed a criminal case initiated against the same petitioners over alleged publication of misleading medical advertisements. The Court had observed that in the complaint, there was "no evidence of falsity of claim, no allegation of falsity of claim nor there is any description of manner how that is misleading."

The case is next posted on August 22.

The petition is moved by Advocates S. Shiv Shankar, B. Ananthu, Cyriac Tom, Sreejith S. Nair.

Case No: Crl.MC 6174/ 2025 and connected cases

Case Title: M/S Divya Pharmacy v. The Drugs Inspector and connected cases

Click to Read/Download Order