Delhi HC Directs Committee On Ayurveda To Provide Recommendations On Vegetarian And Non-Vegetarian Ingredients In Pharmaceuticals Within 10 Weeks
The Delhi High Court directed the committee, established by a statutory advisory board on Ayurveda, to submit its recommendations within a 10-week period regarding the identification of vegetarian and non-vegetarian components in pharmaceuticals.
The Court disposed of the Petition seeking directions against the Government to initiate appropriate action against the product “Divya Manjan” manufactured by the Second Respondent.
“in view of the above, it is expected that the Committee, so constituted, shall give its recommendations within a period of 10 weeks from today”, the Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed.
Advocate Prashant Gupta appeared for the Petitioner and Standing Counsels Mukul Singh and Santosh Kumar Tripathi with Government Prosecutor Kamaldeep appeared for the Union.
The Petitioner sought directions against the Government to initiate appropriate action against the product “Divya Manjan” manufactured by the Second Respondent and to initiate strict legal actions against Respondent no. 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 for misleading and misrepresenting the said product.
The Petitioner further sought directions against Respondent No. 7 to inquire into the absence of a green or red mark on the packaging of the product in question. Notably, the Petitioner alleged that Respondent No. 3 was marketing the product "Divya Manjan" with a green dot on their official website (Patanjali Ayurved).
The petitioner had previously brought a writ petition before this Court, requesting similar relief as sought in this petition. The Court, in its order disposed of the petition, stating that it was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition aimed to direct Respondent No. 1 to prohibit the manufacture of the product "Divya Manjan" by Respondent No. 2, citing violations of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Section 33 EED of the Act empowers the Central Government to prohibit the manufacture of certain drugs in the public interest. While not making any observations on the merits of the case, the Court had granted the petitioner the liberty to approach the appropriate authorities under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The petitioner was instructed to file a complaint within a week, and upon receipt, the authorities were directed to investigate and issue an appropriate order in a reasonable timeframe. Consequently, the Court had disposed of the writ petition, along with any pending applications.
Following the Court's order, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the respondents. Subsequently, the respondents addressed the issue and sent a communication to the petitioner regarding the matter.
Per the communication, a meeting was convened on May 25, 2023, regarding the issue of demarcating between vegetarian and non-vegetarian ingredients on product labels. The Court noted that the Board recommended forming a committee to establish criteria for categorizing raw materials used in drug production as vegetarian, non-vegetarian, or other categories. This decision was made due to the varied interpretations of vegetarianism across religious, ethical, and regional perspectives.
The Court noted that the communication indicated the formation of a committee tasked with establishing criteria to categorize raw materials used in drug production as vegetarian, non-vegetarian, or otherwise. The Court noted that this committee will provide its recommendations within 10 weeks.
Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition.
Cause Title: Yatin Sharma v Union Of India & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Yatin Sharma and Mohit Solanki, Advocates.
Respondent: Ira Singh, Rakesh Chaudhary, Tanvi, Arun Panwar, Rishabh Srivastava, Pradyumn Rao, Utkarsh Singh, Kartik Sharma, Nikita Vir and Prashansa Sharma, Advocates.
