The Supreme Court has provided significant relief to Patanjali Ayurved and its founders, Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, by dismissing the contempt of court charges against them.

Earlier, Ramdev and Acharya faced criticism from the apex court due to the company’s misleading advertisements that targeted evidence-based medicine. These actions were found to violate their prior commitment to refrain from broadcasting or publishing such advertisements.

A bench comprising Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah delivered the judgment, effectively closing the contempt proceedings.

In response to the breach, the founders sought forgiveness from the Supreme Court, with Ramdev offering a public apology for comments made during a November 2023 press conference, following the court's earlier censure of Patanjali Ayurved. They also issued apologies in various newspapers.

The Supreme Court case against Patanjali Ayurved and its founders, Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, was initiated following a plea by the Indian Medical Association (IMA). The plea alleged that Patanjali had launched a smear campaign against the COVID-19 vaccination drive and modern medicine.

In February, the Court imposed a temporary ban on such advertisements and issued contempt notices to the company and Balkrishna for disseminating misleading claims. By November 2023, the Supreme Court had intensified its stance, threatening to impose a fine of ₹1 crore for each false claim made in advertisements for Patanjali Ayurved products that purported to cure diseases. The Court also directed Patanjali to cease publishing misleading advertisements in the future.

Initially, the Court's focus was on Patanjali's misleading ads and the failure of regulatory authorities to act against the company. The Court also sought corrective measures from Patanjali and its promoters. However, the case soon broadened to address larger issues, including misleading advertisements by other consumer goods companies and unethical practices within modern medicine.

The Bench also warned that social media influencers and celebrities endorsing products or services in misleading advertisements would be held equally accountable and liable. The Court noted with concern that some prohibited ads for Patanjali products were still accessible on certain online platforms. Additionally, it directed that the company should not be permitted to sell products for which licenses had been suspended.

The Court also criticized the Uttarakhand government for its apparent collusion with errant licensing officers and its failure to take appropriate action, which led to apologies from Patanjali.

Interestingly, the petitioner side also faced scrutiny. On August 6, the IMA President, Dr. RV Asokan, was instructed by the Supreme Court to publish apologies in prominent newspapers for his statements criticizing the Court. During one of the hearings, the apex court had urged doctors to address unethical practices within their profession. Dr. Asokan had later remarked that it was "unfortunate" that the Supreme Court had criticized the IMA, stating that it had demoralized doctors. The Bench of Justices Kohli and Amanullah took strong exception to Asokan's comments.