On Patanjali Misleading Ads Case, Supreme Court's Tough Questions For Centre
NDTV
Rule 170 of the Drugs and Magical Remedies Act required companies making Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani medicinal preparations to obtain clearances from the state licensing authority before running ads.
The Supreme Court had some tough questions for the centre Tuesday as it continued a marathon hearing into misleading advertisements by Baba Ramdev's Patanjali Ayurved, including those for Coronil, a preparation touted as a "cure" for COVID-19. Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah wanted to know why the government had omitted Rule 170 from the Drugs and Magical Remedies Act, or DMR, which prohibits advertising of medicines as products with "magical" abilities.
Rule 170 had been inserted in the DMR in 2018 to check claims made by companies, including Patanjali, selling ayurvedic preparations. In September last year, however, the AYUSH Ministry made a surprising U-turn, based on a special technical board's inputs, and recommended its omission.
Specifically, Rule 170 required companies making Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani medicinal preparations to obtain clearances from the state licensing authority before running advertisements.
