Author: Minakshi Trivedi, N.B.T. Law College, Nashik
To The Point
The Indian Yoga Guru, Baba Ramdev, who has successfully managed to get recognised by millions of followers not only across India but across the world through his YouTube channel because of his encouragement to people for doing yoga and consuming nutritious food, faced huge controversial criticism because of his products’ unrealistic and false claims. Patanjali products include everything from toothpaste, noodles, and soaps to medicines. He, through his YouTube videos, commenced claiming that the Patanjali medicines, which are stated to be herbomineral preparations, are better than ‘synthetic medicines’ for curing various diseases, from cough and cold to even liver damage, which are not backed by any valid proofs whatsoever. This is a false representation under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, because the goods do not have the claimed use, usefulness, or benefits.
If we think from a legal perspective, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, under Section 2(28), that discusses briefly about misleading advertisements, clearly and explicitly states that before advertisements, the endorser needs to verify all the claims of the product, and in case the endorser is held guilty during the investigation, then he/she will be fined.
Abstract
Knowing and being aware of the products’ false claims is the duty and the right of every citizen as mentioned under the Consumer Protection Act, 2009. Discussing one of the prominent cases regarding the same issue is Patanjali facing backlashes because of its misrepresentation, and as a law student, one immediately knows what the definition of representation is, that is, stating facts of a certain thing or a product, but misrepresentation is either the active concealment of the fact or making false claims with the intention to fool the buyers. In order to avoid these scams, we as an audience need to take active efforts before investing our money and time into consuming products that can impose on us various repercussions and consequences.
This article will discuss the controversy that Baba Ramdev had faced and was identified by the court. It will not only focus on the case but also analyse the case from a legal perspective to make one aware of the consumers’ rights and how various doctrines and principles are and have been enacted to provide protection to the innocent consumers and buyers from the ill intention of the sellers. Not only that, but it serves as a warning and a precaution that the brands and the endorsers should consider before advertising.
Use of Legal Jargon
Misrepresentation
When false uses or description of the products by the brand are claimed, to make consumers believe in them.
Unfair Trade Practice
Defined under Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
“Making unsubstantiated claims about a product’s effectiveness constitutes an unfair trade practice.”
Product Liability
If you want to argue about legal responsibility for the harm a product causes, this is relevant (Section 2(34) and Chapter VI of the CPA, 2019).
“The doctrine of product liability may apply if any consumer suffers harm due to reliance on such claims.
Vicarious Liability
“There may arise the liability if the false things are stated in certain ads by the ones dictated by the brand. ‘The act done through another is done through himself.'”
Caveat Emptor
To protect the consumers and legally entitle the sellers for the products they are selling, the traditional concept has been shifted to a more consumer protection approach in the modern legislation as mentioned in the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
The Proof
News Headlines and Where Everything Started :-
The Patanjali receives court notice over Non-vegetarian ingredients in the vegetarian product.
Yatin Sharma, the petitioner who belongs to the Brahmin community, had used Divya Manjan, the Patanjali product, for a long time and had a green dot on it that showed that it was vegetarian. But after thorough research, he found out that it included a non-vegetarian ingredient, completely contradicting the vegetarian label on the product. The petition also included that Baba Ramdev himself had accepted on screen that samudrapen, an ingredient which was used in the preparation of the Divya Manjan product, was non-vegetarian.
Patanjali ‘misleading customers’? Cases pile up against Baba Ramdev’s ‘Swadeshi’ brand.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India had made a recall of a specific batch of red chilli powder that did not follow the regulations of the Food Safety and Standards Regulations Act, which means it included certain toxins or harmful ingredients not suitable for regular consumption.
Patanjali’s big claim, bigger trouble: Arrest warrant issued against Baba Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna and Divya Pharmacy.
Baba Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna, and Divya Pharmacy face backlash for falsely misrepresenting their products, stating that their products, which include medicines specifically, could get people cured of COVID-19 and diabetes, and these false claims also fall under the scope of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.
The Result And The Judgement :-
The Supreme Court on July 9 recorded Patanjali Ayurved’s submission that it has instructed its exclusive and franchise stores to remove 14 of its herbal medicines, of which licences were suspended, from their shelves.
The Supreme Court has finally closed the case of the Patanjali products after issuing an apology from them and their decision to rectify their past conduct. The misrepresentation and advertisements that violated the Consumer Protection Act, 2009, Food Safety and the Standard Authority of India, and covered the scope of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act were discussed and warned the Patanjali brand to not make such misleading advertisements and false claims, and that it will continue to be under legal scrutiny to ensure that it complies with the guidelines and to ensure that it is not selling any defective products.
Case Laws
Consumer Education and Research Society v. Tata Chemicals Ltd.
It was held that anything that is represented, which attracts or compels consumers to buy their products, must be backed up by verifiable facts, especially when it is something that has relevance to health.
Horlicks Ltd. v. Zydus Wellness Products Ltd.
The Delhi High Court ruled that various wrong claims related to health will and are subjected to unfair trade practices.
Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India.
This is an important judgement that stated clearly in the Supreme court that any claims regarding magical solutions to illness is legally banned, therefore, upholing the consitutionality of the Act, 1954.
Conclusion
In conclusion, one can only say that across the world, many false representations have been made for the sake of increasing their brands’ fame and grasping people’s eyes. Not only law students and lawyers should be aware of the consumers’ rights, but every citizen, since buying and selling is the part and parcel of this life of the globalization period. To conclude, turning a blind eye to the uncertainty about the verifiable facts of the products just because everybody is buying it isn’t only carelessness but also indirectly perpetuating the sellers’ wrongdoings by encouraging them to continue with the same act.
FAQS
What is the full form of the FSSAI ?
The full form of the FSSAI is the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Act.
What is the product recall ?
To legally make the products remove from the market because they are either defective or harmful.
Why does a Product Get Recalled ?
If it contains harmful substances, when it is based on wrong claims, when it is injurious to the health, when it is not providing any benefits as it claimed.
