SC slams IMA, allows Patanjali to file contempt plea against doctors’ body chief

Appearing before a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Patanjali, highlighted an interview given by IMA President Dr RV Ashokan to the press the previous day. In the interview, the IMA chief reportedly criticized the Supreme Court’s observations regarding IMA’s response to complaints of unethical practices by doctors.

Describing the interview as ‘disturbing’, Rohatgi quoted the IMA President’s comments where he termed the Supreme Court’s observations as “unfortunate” and “vague.” The bench requested Rohatgi to submit the interview for the record.

“He (the IMA President) says why has the Court turned its fingers at us…The court is making vague and irrelevant statements…The Court is taking a broadside at us…We have done a great job…Our people have died…This is direct interference with the course of proceedings in this case…he says that these are unfortunate comments…demoralizing private doctors. What is this?”, Rohatgi said.

Also Read: Is Your Apology The Same Size As Your Advertisement? SC Slams Baba Ramdev

In response to the submission, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah remarked, as quoted by Livelaw;

“This is more serious than what we have been doing till now…After all that is happening, you [IMA] do this. Be prepared for more serious consequences.”

Justice Hima Kohli, addressing IMA’s counsel, also commented;

“Self-certification does not help anybody. If what has been said by the other side is correct, you have not covered yourself with glory. There is something you will have to say to explain how would you decide which way we should be…”.

The bench recorded in its order;

“Mr. Rohatgi has also sought to bring attention of this court to an interview given by the current President of petitioner No.1 (IMA), which it is his submission is critical of this Court’s order dated April 23. He seeks leave to file a copy of the publication carrying the interview. Needful shall be done within 2 days.”

The Court was addressing a petition filed by the IMA, initiating a contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved, its MD Acharya Balkrishna, and Baba Ramdev for publishing misleading medical advertisements in violation of a court undertaking.

Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that issuing a caution to the petitioner medical association about the complaints of unethical practices by allopathic doctors, the Supreme Court bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed, “The petitioner (IMA) needs to put its own house in order regarding alleged unethical acts of the organisation where medicines are prescribed, which is expensive and unnecessary.”

The apex court said that wherever there is a misuse of the position by the IMA to prescribe expensive medicines and the line of treatment, it needs “closer examination”.

It further told IMA that while it is pointing fingers at Patanjali, four fingers are pointing back at them. The bench asked, “Your (IMA) doctors also endorsing medicines in the allopathic field, if that’s happening, why should we not turn the beam at you (IMA)?”

“Your (IMA) members also endorsed such products… your members are prescribing medicines,” the bench said, while hearing the case filed by IMA against an alleged smear campaign carried out by Patanjali Ayurveda Ltd and its founders against the COVID-19 vaccination drive and modern medicine

On April 16, the apex court had warned Ramdev and Balkrishna against any attempt to “degrade allopathy” and permitted them to tender a “public apology and show contrition” within a week in the contempt proceedings in the misleading advertisements case against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd.

Earlier, on two occasions, they tendered unconditional and unqualified apology with regard to the issue of advertisement. However, the bench refused to accept their affidavits, tendering apologies, and slammed them for the misleading advertisements carried out by them and the company. The apex court also slammed the Uttarakhand government for being “hand-in-glove” with errant licencing officers who failed to take action against Patanjali for publishing misleading advertisements.

The top court had earlier also directed Patanjali not to publish false advertisements in the future and later issued contempt of court notices to the company, Ramdev and Balkrishna.