Licences of 14 Patanjali drugs revoked, Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority tells Supreme Court
The court had pulled up the state government for not acting against Patanjali, which had published misleading advertisements of its products.
Manufacturing licences of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurved and Divya Pharmacy were suspended for repeated violation of the 1945 Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority for Ayurvedic and Unani Services told the Supreme Court on Monday, The Hindu reported.
The state government body shared the information while apologising to the court after it was pulled up earlier this month for not taking action against the Patanjali Ayurved for misleading advertisements of Ayurvedic products.
The 14 drugs that have been banned with immediate effect are: Swasari Gold, Swasari Vati, Bronchom, Swasari Pravahi, Swasari Avaleh, Mukta Vati Extra Power, Lipidom, Bp Grit, Madhugrit, Madhunashini Vati Extra Power, Livamrit Advance, Livogrit, Eyegrit Gold and Patanjali Drishti Eye Drop, the newspaper reported.
Under India’s drug laws, Uttarakhand has the authority to take punitive action against Patanjali since the company’s manufacturing units are located there.
The State Licensing Authority also informed the court that it has filed a criminal complaint against Patanjali Ayurved, the company’s co-founder yoga guru Ramdev and Managing Director Balkrishna for violating the Drugs and Magic Remedies Objectionable Advertisements Act, Bar and Bench reported.
A division bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing a petition filed by the Indian Medical Association against Patanjali Ayurved accusing the company of carrying out a “smear campaign” against modern medicine and the Covid-19 vaccination drive.
At a hearing on April 10, the court had ordered the current and previous officers of the Uttarakhand licensing authority to file detailed affidavits explaining why they did not take action against Patanjali under the Drugs and Magic Remedies Objectionable Advertisements Act for misleading advertisements.
“Why should we not come down like a ton of bricks on your officers,” Kohli asked. “They have been filibustering.”
The court had also reprimanded Ramdev and Balkrishna for an advertisement issued by their company on December 4 after it had said in an undertaking on November 21 that it would not make any “casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine”.
Also read: A brief history of Patanjali’s dangerous claims