Yoga guru Baba Ramdev informed the Delhi High Court on Thursday that he would remove the controversial portions of a recently published video from all social media platforms, after the court raised concerns over alleged disparaging and communally divisive remarks made against pharmaceutical company Hamdard and its products.
This development marks the second time in ten days that Ramdev has offered to take down such content following sharp observations by the court.
Court Threatens Contempt Proceedings
The High Court’s latest intervention came after it was brought to its attention that Ramdev had shared a new video despite a previous order dated April 22, which explicitly barred him from making any disparaging references to Hamdard or its products. The earlier directive also required Ramdev to submit an undertaking pledging to refrain from making similar statements or posts in the future.
On Thursday, the bench, led by Justice Amit Bansal, indicated that it was considering initiating contempt proceedings against Ramdev for what appeared to be a direct violation of the April order. The court took particular note of the tone and content of the new video, which allegedly included similar claims to those made previously.
Claims of Communal Overtones
Senior advocate Sandeep Sethi, appearing on behalf of Hamdard, informed the court that the latest video—nearly three hours in duration—contained around two minutes of content referring specifically to the company in a manner consistent with past communal insinuations. In both videos, Ramdev allegedly suggested that Hamdard’s profits were used to fund religious institutions like mosques and madrasas.
Sethi argued that Ramdev had framed the narrative as one of communal polarity, stating that while Patanjali’s revenues supported educational and spiritual institutions such as “gurukuls” and “acharyakulams,” Hamdard’s earnings were purportedly diverted toward religious structures of a particular community.
“This is not merely a case of disparagement. It is a question of upholding the majesty of the court,” Sethi said, accusing Ramdev of “contumacious” conduct by deliberately repeating the very actions the court had previously restrained.
Judicial Rebuke and Compliance Assurance
During the hearing, Justice Bansal questioned Ramdev’s legal counsel, senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, about mechanisms to ensure adherence to the earlier court order. “I don’t care about his political views. I’m concerned with the suit. How do we ensure compliance so that he does not refer to their name or their goods?” the judge asked.
Nayar responded that while Ramdev could agree not to issue disparaging remarks, it would not be reasonable to expect a permanent prohibition on referencing Hamdard, as such a directive could infringe on commercial expression.
In response to the court’s stern stance, Nayar and senior advocate Jayant Mehta later conveyed, after consulting with their client, that Ramdev would remove the portion of the video in question.
ALSO READ: ‘Don’t demoralize the forces’: SC rebukes petitioner seeking judicial probe into Pahalgam attack
Court Issues 24-Hour Compliance Deadline
Accepting the submission, the High Court ordered Ramdev and Patanjali to take down the offending content from all social media platforms and other media outlets within 24 hours. The court also directed Ramdev to file an affidavit certifying compliance with the order.
Additionally, Justice Bansal will on Friday consider an application filed by Hamdard under provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, seeking action for wilful disobedience of the court’s April 22 order.
Background of the Dispute
The ongoing legal tussle stems from a suit filed by Hamdard Laboratories, which accuses Ramdev and Patanjali of trademark infringement, defamation, and product disparagement. The controversy escalated when Ramdev, in an earlier video, allegedly referred to Hamdard’s flagship product Rooh Afza as part of a so-called “sharbat jihad.”
In that video, Ramdev claimed that while profits from Patanjali’s rose sharbat supported educational and cultural initiatives like Patanjali University, Hamdard’s earnings were funneled toward communal causes. “Jaise love jihad, vote jihad chal raha hai naa, waise sharbat jihad bhi chal raha hai (Just like there is love jihad and vote jihad, there is also sharbat jihad),” Ramdev had remarked.
Hamdard Seeks Damages and Injunction
In addition to seeking the removal of objectionable content, Hamdard has requested a permanent injunction restraining Patanjali from further infringing or disparaging its trademarks. The company is also demanding damages of up to ₹2 crore, a public apology, and a retraction.
Furthermore, Hamdard has urged the court to instruct the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) to block access to the videos and other related material online..
