Indian Medical Association President's Interview Interferes With Court Proceedings, Patanjali's Lawyer Tells Supreme Court
While hearing the contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 30) turned its focus on the Indian Medical Association, after Patanjali's lawyer flagged an interview given by the IMA President saying it was critical of the observations made by the Court against IMA members.Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi (appearing for Patanjali) brought the attention of the bench...
While hearing the contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 30) turned its focus on the Indian Medical Association, after Patanjali's lawyer flagged an interview given by the IMA President saying it was critical of the observations made by the Court against IMA members.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi (appearing for Patanjali) brought the attention of the bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah to the interview given by IMA President Dr RV Ashokan to the press yesterday, in which he reportedly criticized the Supreme Court's observation that IMA should act regarding complaints of unethical practices by doctors.
Calling the interview 'disturbing', Rohatgi said that the IMA President termed the Supreme Court's observations "unfortunate" and "vague". The bench asked Rohatgi to bring the interview on record.
To quote the senior counsel, "He 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...Out 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?".
Hearing the submission, Justice Amanullah responded, "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 Kohli, turning to IMA's counsel, also remarked, "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...".
In the order, the bench recorded: "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 hearing a petition filed by the IMA, in which it has initiated a contempt case against Patanjali Ayurved, its MD Acharya Balkrishna and Baba Ramdev for publishing misleading medical advertisements in breach of an undertaking given to the Court.
Also from today's hearing - Supreme Court Says There Is 'Marked Improvement' In Public Apologies Published By Patanjali & Baba Ramdev, Seeks Original Copies
Case Title: Indian Medical Association v. Union of India | W.P.(C) No. 645/2022