The Delhi High Court came down heavily on Patanjali founder Baba Ramdev on Tuesday for making communal remarks targeting Hamdard Laboratories and its iconic beverage, Rooh Afza. During a preliminary hearing in the case Hamdard National Foundation India v. Patanjali Foods Limited & Anr, Justice Amit Bansal expressed shock at the comments, warning that a strong judicial order may follow.
“It shocks the conscience of the court. Indefensible,” Justice Bansal remarked, directing Ramdev’s legal counsel to seek instructions and ensure his presence in court.
The controversy stems from a video circulated on April 3, in which Ramdev, while promoting Patanjali’s “Gulab Sharbat,” made derogatory remarks about Rooh Afza. In the video, he alleged that Hamdard was channeling profits into building masjids and madrasas, and used the provocative term “sharbat jihad.”
Congress leader Digvijaya Singh subsequently filed a police complaint against Ramdev in Bhopal, accusing him of inciting communal hatred. Despite the backlash, Ramdev claimed he had not mentioned any specific brand by name.
Representing Hamdard in court, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that Ramdev’s actions went far beyond product disparagement and constituted hate speech. “This is shocking. It’s about creating a communal divide. The law of defamation cannot protect such conduct,” he stated.
Rohatgi urged the court to take immediate action, stressing that such content “should not be allowed even for a moment” given the volatile social climate in the country. He also informed the court that Ramdev had similarly targeted the company Himalaya, allegedly because it is also Muslim-owned.
Highlighting Ramdev’s prior controversies—including a Supreme Court censure over his comments on allopathy—Rohatgi added, “A hard hand is required to nip this in the bud.”
The legal team for Hamdard included Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Sandeep Sethi, supported by a team of advocates including Pravin Anand, Dhruv Anand, Nikhil Rohatgi, Udita Patro, and others.
The case is expected to continue with heightened scrutiny, as the court considers whether Ramdev’s remarks amount to actionable hate speech.
