Explainer India National News

Delhi HC Seeks Committee Input On Patanjali Toothpaste Non-Veg Ingredient Claim

Recommendations have been summoned by the Delhi High Court from the Committee established by the Union Ministry of Ayush. The focus is on determining criteria for categorizing raw materials in drug production as vegetarian, non-vegetarian, or other categories.

Justice Subramonium Prasad directed the Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani Drugs Technical Advisory Board (ASUDTAB) Committee to provide its recommendations within 10 weeks.

The court heard a case filed by attorney Yatin Sharma, who was requesting that Patanjali be held liable for the non-vegetarian ingredients in its product “Divya Manjan,” despite the product’s label indicating it is vegetarian.

Also Read: Haryana: Man Slits 14-Year-Old Girlā€™s Throat, Suspecting Theft

Sharma filed a lawsuit against Patanjali, alleging that the company was deceiving the public by misrepresenting its product, inflicting harm on religious feelings, and defrauding customers.

Sharma lodged a complaint with the Ministry of Ayush on the matter in July 2017. As per the Ministry’s response, Rule 161 of the 1945 Drugs and Cosmetics Rules does not include any provision mentioning a sign or mark indicating that the product in issue contains non-vegetarian items.

It added that the ASUDTAB Board had suggested creating a committee to establish the standards for classifying raw materials during its meeting on May 25 last year.

According to the Ministry, there are a number of religious, ethical, and geographical factors that influence how one interprets whether someone is vegetarian or not.

ā€œA perusal of the aforesaid communication dated 01.08.2023 shows that a Committee has been constituted to determine the criteria by which raw materials used in the production of drugs can be categorised into veg, non- veg or more categories,ā€ the court said.
It added, ā€œIn view of the above, it is expected that the Committee, so constituted, shall give its recommendations within a period of 10 weeks from today.ā€

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Prashant Gupta, Mr. Yatin Sharma and Mr. Mohit Solanki, Advocates Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Mukul Singh, CGSC with Mr. Kamaldeep, GP and Ms. Ira Singh, Advocate for R-1, 9 & 11; Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary and Ms. Tanvi, Advocates for R-7; Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Standing Counsel (C) for GNCTD with Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr. Rishabh Srivastava, Mr. Pradyumn Rao, Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Mr. Kartik Sharma, Ms. Nikita Vir and Ms. Prashansa Sharma, Advocates for R-8

Dear Readers,
As an independent media platform, we do not take advertisements from governments and corporate houses. It is you, our readers, who have supported us on our journey to do honest and unbiased journalism. Please contribute, so that we can continue to do the same in future.

Related posts