Supreme Court Warns States/UTs Of Contempt Proceedings Over Inaction On Misleading Medical Advertisements

The Supreme Court today warned that it will initiate contempt proceedings against states and union territories that failed to take action against misleading advertisements and medical claims that run contrary to law.“We make it clear that every find non-compliance by any of the states and union territories we may have to initiate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the concerned States”, a bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan stated.The Court was hearing a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) regarding misleading claims and advertisements targeting modern or “allopathic” medicine.On May, 7, 2024, the Court had directed all the State Governments/Union Territories to file affidavits of their Licensing authorities regarding the action taken since 2018 by them in respect of misleading advertisements that violate Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Consumer Protection Act, 2019. On July 30, 2024, the Court directed all the State Governments/Union Territories to explain their inaction in imposing penalties and deterrents for compliances of the statutes.Today, Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat highlighted that under Sections 3 and 4 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, prosecution is the sole remedy available against violators. However, affidavits from states indicated a lack of enforcement, with no prosecutions being pursued.Justice Oka remarked that the Delhi government's explanation—that identifying offenders is challenging—was “peculiar.” Addressing Goa's counsel, Justice Oka queried why no action had been taken on the basis of complaints received. Similarly, the Court questioned Karnataka for failing to explain steps taken to identify 25 unnamed offenders. Further, in Pondicherry, action is not taken though there are complaints, he noted.“We will take contempt action now if we find such response by the states”, he remarked.The Court laid out a compliance schedule for states and union territories:Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, and Jammu & Kashmir:Compliance to be reviewed on February 10, 2025.Additional affidavits, if any, must be submitted by February 3, 2025.Copies of affidavits must be furnished to the Amicus Curiae who can compile and submit a report.Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Pondicherry, and Punjab:Compliance to be reviewed on February 24, 2025.Further affidavits, if any, must be filed by February 17, 2025.Remaining States and Union Territories:Compliance will be considered on March 17, 2025.Affidavits must be filed by March 3, 2025.Separately, the Court discharged contempt proceedings against the IMA President regarding remarks made in a media interview. Notice in this matter was issued in May 2024, following allegations that the President's statements were contemptuous. The Court accepted an apology tendered by the IMA President, supported by an affidavit, and decided no further action was necessary.Background on Previous ProceedingsThe current case originated from a petition by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) seeking regulation of medical advertisements by Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. The case evolved to include contempt proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved, its MD Acharya Balkrishna, and co-founder Baba Ramdev for violating a previous court undertaking against publishing misleading advertisements.On May 7, 2024, the Supreme Court passed directions for comprehensive measures to curb misleading advertisements. A bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah held:Advertisers and public figures endorsing products are equally accountable under the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) guidelines. Guideline 13 emphasized due diligence by endorsers.Advertisers to submit self-declaration forms, as per the Cable Television Network Rules, 1994, before airing advertisements. These forms must be uploaded to the Broadcast Seva Portal of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. A similar portal for press and print media was to be established within four weeks.Fundamental Right to HealthThe Court asserted that the fundamental right to health includes a consumer's right to know the quality of products. Advertisers were required to follow Rule 7 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, ensuring advertisements did not offend decency or mislead consumers.Ministry Compliance and Dashboard ProposalIn order dated July 30, 2024, the Court directed the Ministry of AYUSH, alongside other ministries, to take steps against misleading advertisements and non-compliance with related statutes. It proposed setting up a public dashboard for state-level complaint tracking and action.Contempt Proceedings and ApologiesPatanjali published misleading ads despite the Court's earlier orders. Apologies were subsequently published by Patanjali, Baba Ramdev, and Acharya Balkrishna, leading the Court to close contempt...

Supreme Court Warns States/UTs Of Contempt Proceedings Over Inaction On Misleading Medical Advertisements

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags