The Supreme Court has taken significant action against Patanjali for its advertising practices. The court penalized the company for discrediting allopathy and promoting its products as offering 'permanent relief' for chronic conditions. This was found to be misleading and in violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.
Many question whether the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act is effective in curbing misleading advertisements. Despite having frameworks to penalize such practices, enforcement remains a challenge. The low number of convictions suggests limitations in the Act's effectiveness, as companies like Patanjali often repeat their offenses without significant repercussions.
The court issued a contempt notice to Patanjali and its managing director for breaching directives against exaggerated claims and discrediting allopathy. Furthermore, the court criticized the Centre for its inaction and imposed a temporary ban on advertising medicinal products by Patanjali.
Patanjali's promotion of 'miracle cures' for diseases like diabetes raises serious public health concerns. Such misleading claims can jeopardize patient health by leading to delays in appropriate treatment. The promotion of unproven remedies can exacerbate health conditions, making it crucial for regulatory bodies to address these issues effectively.
Q1. Why was Patanjali penalized by the Supreme Court?
Answer: The Supreme Court penalized Patanjali for discrediting allopathy and promoting misleading claims about 'permanent relief' from chronic conditions, violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act.
Q2. What challenges does the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act face?
Answer: The Act struggles with enforcement, resulting in few convictions, which allows companies like Patanjali to continue misleading advertising practices.
Q3. What did the court rule regarding Patanjali's advertising?
Answer: The court issued a contempt notice to Patanjali and its managing director and imposed a temporary ban on their medicinal product advertisements due to misleading claims.
Q4. How can 'miracle cures' affect public health?
Answer: 'Miracle cures' can pose health risks by delaying proper treatment for chronic conditions, leading to potentially severe health consequences for patients.
Q5. What is the significance of the contempt notice?
Answer: The contempt notice signifies the court's serious stance against misleading advertising and aims to hold Patanjali accountable for its practices.
Question 1: What was the main reason for the Supreme Court's action against Patanjali?
A) Violation of consumer rights
B) Discrediting allopathy
C) Promotion of herbal products
D) Misleading health claims
Correct Answer: B
Question 2: Which Act does Patanjali's advertising practices violate?
A) Consumer Protection Act
B) Drugs and Magic Remedies Act
C) Food Safety Standards Act
D) Medicinal Products Regulation Act
Correct Answer: B
Question 3: What penalty was imposed on Patanjali by the Supreme Court?
A) Financial fine
B) Temporary ban on advertisements
C) Permanent closure
D) Public apology
Correct Answer: B
Question 4: Why are 'miracle cures' considered harmful?
A) They are expensive
B) They provide false hope
C) They can delay proper treatment
D) They are illegal
Correct Answer: C
Question 5: What criticism did the court have towards the Centre?
A) Inaction on misleading ads
B) Overregulation of pharmaceuticals
C) Lack of funding
D) Poor health policies
Correct Answer: A
Question 6: What does the contempt notice signify in legal terms?
A) A warning for future behavior
B) A serious legal reprimand
C) An indication of support
D) A request for a hearing
Correct Answer: B
Question 7: How does the public perceive 'miracle cures' according to the article?
A) As effective solutions
B) As dangerous and misleading
C) As overpriced
D) As a temporary relief
Correct Answer: B
Kutos : AI Assistant!
