38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, October 31, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Uttarakhand High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd And Its Founders [Read Order]

By Saket Sourav      14 June, 2025 05:57 PM      0 Comments
Uttarakhand High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd And Its Founders

Uttarakhand: The Uttarakhand High Court has delivered a significant judgment quashing criminal proceedings against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and its founders over alleged misleading medical advertisements, emphasizing procedural lapses and concerns regarding fundamental rights.

Justice Vivek Bharti Sharma made crucial observations on the procedural requirements for prosecuting cases under the Drugs and Magical Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954.

The court addressed Criminal Misc. Application No. 118 of 2025, filed by M/s Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. and others, seeking to set aside the summoning order dated 16.04.2024 and quash proceedings in Criminal Case No. 3892 of 2024. The court noted, “This criminal misc. application is filed by the petitioners/accused under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for setting aside the summoning order dated 16.04.2024 and to quash the proceedings.”

Addressing the specific concerns about the complaint filed by the State, the court observed, “The complaint case was filed by the State to summon, try, and punish the petitioners/accused for the offence punishable under Sections 3 & 4 of the 1954 Act, read with Rule 6 thereof, based on letters from the Ayush Mantralaya regarding allegedly misleading advertisements for medicines like Madhugrit, Madhunashini, Divya Lipidom Tablet, and others.”

The court highlighted significant procedural and legal deficiencies in the case, stating, “There is no allegation in the Complaint Case as to how and what was false in the alleged advertisement. Rather, there is no allegation or averment at all that the alleged advertisements were false.”

In a critical observation about the cognizance order, the court stated, “In the impugned order dated 16.04.2024, there is not even a single observation that may reflect the application of judicial mind by the trial court while taking cognizance and summoning the accused persons.”

The court emphasized several key legal principles, including the limitation period for taking cognizance, noting that “most of the offences were allegedly committed by the petitioners prior to 15.04.2023, that is, more than one year before the date when cognizance was taken.”

Regarding the vicarious liability of directors, the court referenced the Supreme Court’s judgment in Sunil Bharti Mittal vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, stating that “when the company is the offender, vicarious liability of the Directors cannot be imputed automatically, in the absence of any statutory provision to this effect.”

The court also addressed the fundamental right to carry on trade and business, observing, “It is an inalienable fundamental right of every Indian citizen to carry on any occupation, trade, or business under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed under the law.”

In its final directive, the court stated, “The impugned cognizance and summoning order dated 16.04.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 3892 of 2024 against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4 & 7 of the ‘1954 Act’ is hereby set aside.”

The court further emphasized that the sine qua non for taking cognizance is the application of judicial mind by the Magistrate, and that a person ought not to be dragged into court merely because a complaint has been filed.

Mr. Piyush Garg appeared as counsel for the petitioners, while Mr. Deepak Bisht, the learned Deputy Advocate General, appeared for the State of Uttarakhand.

Case Title: M/s Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. & Others vs. State of Uttarakhand
 

[Read Order]



Share this article:

About:

Saket is a final-year law student at The National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam. He has...Read more

Follow:
Linkedin


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

The sanctity to the finality of judicial orders should never deter a Court in correcting its plain errors: Uttarakhand High Court Modifies its 2018 judgment Pertaining to Noise Limits for Loudspeakers The sanctity to the finality of judicial orders should never deter a Court in correcting its plain errors: Uttarakhand High Court Modifies its 2018 judgment Pertaining to Noise Limits for Loudspeakers

Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia while allowing a plea seeking modification of a directive issued by the Uttarakhand High Court in its 2018 judgment setting maximum noise level for loudspeakers.

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses PIL Filed against Use of Siren by an MLA, His Family Members with 50K Cost Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses PIL Filed against Use of Siren by an MLA, His Family Members with 50K Cost

Uttarakhand High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks, he shall recover the said amount as arrears of land revenue," the Court further directed. Uttarakhand High Court, Uttarakhand High Court order, Uttarakhand High Court judgement, Uttarakhand High Court chief justice

Chamoli District Judge suspended for obtaining womans call records, cleared of misconduct charge by Uttarakhand HC Chamoli District Judge suspended for obtaining womans call records, cleared of misconduct charge by Uttarakhand HC

Uttarakhand High Court sets aside the suspension of the Chamoli District judge accused of obtaining call detail records of a woman employee. Read more about the case here.

Relocation of Uttarakhand HC outside Nainital: SC stays HC's order [Read Judgment] Relocation of Uttarakhand HC outside Nainital: SC stays HC's order [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has stayed an order of Uttarakhand High Court directing the state to explore sites for relocation of the High Court outside Nainital.

TRENDING NEWS

sc-hints-at-pan-india-guidelines-on-timeline-to-frame-charges
Trending Judiciary
SC hints at pan-India guidelines on timeline to frame charges

SC mulls pan-India guidelines to curb delays in framing charges; notes cases where charges aren’t framed even after years despite BNSS mandate of 60 days.

30 October, 2025 12:22 PM
limitation-for-continuous-breach-runs-only-till-contract-expiry-kerala-hc-clarifies
Trending Judiciary
Limitation for Continuous Breach Runs Only Till Contract Expiry: Kerala High Court Clarifies [Read Judgment]

Kerala HC clarifies that for continuous breach of contract, limitation under Article 55 starts when breach ceases; once contract ends, breach cannot continue.

30 October, 2025 01:37 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-quashes-uapa-arrests-holds-remand-courts-explanation-cannot-replace-written-grounds-of-arrest
Trending Judiciary
SC Quashes UAPA Arrests, Holds Remand Court’s Explanation Cannot Replace Written Grounds Of Arrest [Read Order]

Supreme Court quashes UAPA arrests, ruling that remand court’s explanation cannot substitute the mandatory written grounds of arrest.

25 October, 2025 11:10 AM
ngt-orders-probe-into-illegal-tree-felling-in-delhis-civil-lines-directs-action-within-three-months
Trending Environment
NGT Orders Probe into Illegal Tree Felling in Delhi’s Civil Lines, Directs Action Within Three Months [Read Order]

NGT directs Tree Officer to probe illegal tree felling in Delhi’s Civil Lines and take action under the Delhi Preservation of Trees Act, 1994.

25 October, 2025 11:28 AM
gauhati-hc-quashes-fir-against-cnn-news18-anchor-akansha-swarup-over-kamakhya-temple-remarks
Trending CelebStreet
Gauhati HC Quashes FIR Against CNN-News18 Anchor Akansha Swarup Over Kamakhya Temple Remarks [Read Order]

Gauhati HC quashes FIR against CNN-News18 anchor Akansha Swarup, ruling her Kamakhya Temple remarks were careless but lacked malicious intent.

25 October, 2025 11:43 AM
delhi-hc-upholds-divorce-on-cruelty-grounds-denies-alimony-to-financially-independent-wife
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Upholds Divorce On Cruelty Grounds, Denies Alimony To Financially Independent Wife [Read Judgment]

Delhi HC upholds divorce on cruelty grounds, denies alimony to IRTS officer wife, ruling that alimony is for need-based justice, not enrichment.

25 October, 2025 12:10 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email