Delhi High Court Restrains Patanjali from Broadcasting “Dhoka” Chyawanprash Advertisement

 

The Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to Dabur India Limited by restraining Patanjali Ayurved Limited and Patanjali Foods Limited from airing or publishing their controversial advertisement referring to other chyawanprash brands as “dhoka,” meaning deception or fraud. The Court observed that the advertisement went beyond acceptable standards of comparative advertising and appeared to disparage competing products, thereby justifying the grant of an injunction.

The dispute arose after Dabur, a leading manufacturer of chyawanprash, filed a commercial suit alleging that Patanjali’s advertisement portrayed other chyawanprash brands in a misleading and derogatory manner. In the advertisement, Patanjali claimed that consumers were being deceived by other brands and promoted its own “Special Chyawanprash” as the genuine product. Dabur argued that this statement directly attacked the integrity of its brand and misled the public into believing that other products in the market were fake or substandard.

The single-judge bench of Justice Tejas Karia examined the matter and held that Dabur had made out a strong prima facie case for interim relief. The Court reasoned that an average consumer, after watching the advertisement, would likely conclude that other chyawanprash brands were unreliable and deceptive. This, according to the Court, went beyond permissible competitive marketing and amounted to commercial disparagement of rival products. The Court also took into account the prominence of the advertisement, which featured a well-known public figure and used strong language that could easily influence public perception.

The Court directed Patanjali and its affiliates to immediately remove, disable, and block the advertisement across all television channels, social media platforms, print media, and online outlets within seventy-two hours. The order restraining Patanjali from broadcasting or publishing the advertisement will remain in force until further directions from the Court. The matter was posted for further hearing in due course.

In its reasoning, the Court emphasized that while the law allows companies to engage in comparative advertising and highlight the superiority of their own products, it does not permit them to denigrate or disparage competitors’ goods. The Court clarified that freedom of commercial expression does not extend to false, misleading, or defamatory advertising. Advertisers, therefore, must ensure that their campaigns are based on verifiable claims and do not malign rival products or mislead consumers.

Patanjali contended that its statements were merely rhetorical expressions meant to highlight product quality and were not directed at any specific competitor. However, the Court rejected this defense, stating that the overall message and tone of the advertisement clearly implied that all other chyawanprash brands were deceptive. The judgment reinforces the principle that comparative advertising must remain within legal boundaries and should not resort to sweeping generalizations that tarnish the reputation of others in the market.

In conclusion, the Delhi High Court’s order serves as an important reminder for advertisers that while creative freedom in marketing is permissible, it must operate within the framework of fairness, honesty, and responsibility. The decision underscores that advertisements designed to mislead or disparage entire product categories will not be tolerated, thereby promoting a more ethical and balanced approach to commercial competition.

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community