NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court has restrained Patanjali Ayurved from airing, publishing or circulating an advertisement that described other chyawanprash brands as “dhoka” (deception). The court also directed the company to remove the ad from all television, digital and print platforms within three days.
The court observed that the ad wrongly suggested that only Patanjali’s chyawanprash was genuine while all other similar products were deceptive.
“To convey a message that only Patanjali’s product is genuine and others are deceptive is incorrect and disparages the entire class of chyawanprash in general,” the court observed.
“ Anybody who manufactures an ayurvedic product by following the statute and the scriptures as enlisted in the statute, cannot be denigrated as deceptive, when the statute considers it to be as good and permissible ayurvedic drug, that is, chyawanprash in the present case,” Justice Tejas Karia said.
The interim order came on a plea by Dabur India , which claimed that the 25-second Patanjali advertisement damaged the reputation of all other chyawanprash manufacturers.
The ad, titled “51 herbs. 1 truth. Patanjali Chyawanprash !”, showed a woman feeding chyawanprash to her child and saying, “Chalo dhoka khao.”
Yoga guru Ramdev then added, “Adhikansh log chyawanprash ke naam par dhoka kha rahe hain” (Most people are fooled in the name of chyawanprash).
According to the court, such statements could mislead the public, especially since Ramdev is widely seen as an authority on yoga and Ayurvedic practices.
“For an average viewer of the advertisement featuring Ramdev, a well-known authority on yoga and vedic practices, and his assertion that only his product is genuine chyawanprash is likely to create a strong impression,” the court highlighted.
It added that both in tone and intent, the advertisement disparaged the entire chyawanprash category.
“If Patanjali is disparaging a whole class of products, its act will adversely affect its competitors,” the court said, noting that Dabur, as the market leader, would be particularly harmed.
The high court found that Dabur had made a prima facie case for an injunction and said that not granting one would cause the company irreparable harm. It therefore restrained Patanjali from issuing or broadcasting the ad in any form.
In response, Patanjali argued that the ad was meant to highlight its own product and that the use of “dhoka” was simply creative expression, protected under the right to free speech (Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution).
The court rejected this defence, ruling that the ad went “beyond permissible puffery” and amounted to misleading disparagement.
“Advertisers are free to praise their own products but cannot denigrate an entire class of competing products, especially when such statements may mislead consumers,” the order said.
The court also observed that stopping the broadcast would not materially harm Patanjali, since it could continue promoting its chyawanprash without referring to competitors as deceptive.
Earlier, in July, the high court had similarly directed Patanjali to delete the line “Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?” from another advertisement after Dabur challenged it. That decision was later upheld by a division bench.
The court observed that the ad wrongly suggested that only Patanjali’s chyawanprash was genuine while all other similar products were deceptive.
“To convey a message that only Patanjali’s product is genuine and others are deceptive is incorrect and disparages the entire class of chyawanprash in general,” the court observed.
“ Anybody who manufactures an ayurvedic product by following the statute and the scriptures as enlisted in the statute, cannot be denigrated as deceptive, when the statute considers it to be as good and permissible ayurvedic drug, that is, chyawanprash in the present case,” Justice Tejas Karia said.
The interim order came on a plea by Dabur India , which claimed that the 25-second Patanjali advertisement damaged the reputation of all other chyawanprash manufacturers.
The ad, titled “51 herbs. 1 truth. Patanjali Chyawanprash !”, showed a woman feeding chyawanprash to her child and saying, “Chalo dhoka khao.”
Yoga guru Ramdev then added, “Adhikansh log chyawanprash ke naam par dhoka kha rahe hain” (Most people are fooled in the name of chyawanprash).
According to the court, such statements could mislead the public, especially since Ramdev is widely seen as an authority on yoga and Ayurvedic practices.
“For an average viewer of the advertisement featuring Ramdev, a well-known authority on yoga and vedic practices, and his assertion that only his product is genuine chyawanprash is likely to create a strong impression,” the court highlighted.
It added that both in tone and intent, the advertisement disparaged the entire chyawanprash category.
“If Patanjali is disparaging a whole class of products, its act will adversely affect its competitors,” the court said, noting that Dabur, as the market leader, would be particularly harmed.
The high court found that Dabur had made a prima facie case for an injunction and said that not granting one would cause the company irreparable harm. It therefore restrained Patanjali from issuing or broadcasting the ad in any form.
In response, Patanjali argued that the ad was meant to highlight its own product and that the use of “dhoka” was simply creative expression, protected under the right to free speech (Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution).
The court rejected this defence, ruling that the ad went “beyond permissible puffery” and amounted to misleading disparagement.
“Advertisers are free to praise their own products but cannot denigrate an entire class of competing products, especially when such statements may mislead consumers,” the order said.
The court also observed that stopping the broadcast would not materially harm Patanjali, since it could continue promoting its chyawanprash without referring to competitors as deceptive.
Earlier, in July, the high court had similarly directed Patanjali to delete the line “Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?” from another advertisement after Dabur challenged it. That decision was later upheld by a division bench.
You may also like
Veteran Naga politician, five-time MLA Imkong L. Imchen passes away
Eight CPM workers get life imprisonment for murder of Trinamool activist
ECGC Job Openings: Golden Opportunity for Probationary Officer Positions, Salary Up to 65,000
Silver Prices Surge on November 11: Strong Demand Pushes Rates Higher Across Major Cities
Man digs backyard for a pool, finds gold worth ₹7 crore and gets to keep it
