SC Ends IMA’s Misleading Ads Battle with Patanjali, Lifts Ad Approval Rule

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, August 12, closed a long-running petition by the Indian Medical Association (IMA) over misleading advertisements for traditional medicines, bringing an end to its own interim order that required prior state approval for such ads.

The verdict clears the way for AYUSH companies to advertise without mandatory pre-clearance from state licensing authorities.

The IMA had approached the court against Patanjali Ayurveda, accusing it of making unverified claims about its products and disparaging modern medicine. Earlier hearings before Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan also examined lapses by authorities in acting against misleading content, and even initiated contempt proceedings against Patanjali's Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna-later closed after public apologies.

The dispute intensified after the Ministry of AYUSH deleted Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, on July 1, 2024. The rule required state-level approval before advertising Ayurvedic, Siddha, or Unani medicines to prevent exaggerated or false health claims. In August 2024, a separate Supreme Court bench stayed the deletion, temporarily keeping the requirement in place.

Amicus Curiae Shadan Farasat noted that some states continued enforcing Rule 170 despite its deletion. Justice Viswanathan questioned the legality of applying a provision removed by the Centre. Opponents of the deletion warned of risks to consumers, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued existing laws and self-regulation made the rule unnecessary. Justice Nagarathna added that if manufacturing AYUSH products was allowed, advertising them was a "natural business practice."

The bench held that the IMA's concerns had been addressed and no further judicial intervention was needed. It vacated the August 2024 stay, disposed of the petition, and allowed challenges to the deletion of Rule 170 to be taken to the High Court.