Key Points
- Contempt Proceedings: Delhi High Court finds Baba Ramdev in prima facie contempt for releasing another video with “sharbat jihad” remarks against Hamdard’s Rooh Afza, despite previous court orders to desist.
- Court’s Sharp Rebuke: Justice Amit Bansal says Ramdev “lives in his own world” and is “not in control of anyone,” expressing strong disapproval of his conduct.
- Communal Angle Alleged: Hamdard’s counsel argues Ramdev’s remarks amount to hate speech and communal division, not just product disparagement.
- Background: Ramdev had previously claimed Rooh Afza’s profits fund mosques and madrasas, prompting the court to order immediate removal of such content and an undertaking not to repeat it.
- Next Steps: Court to issue a contempt notice and summon Ramdev for further proceedings.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday strongly reprimanded Yoga guru and Patanjali founder Baba Ramdev for allegedly violating its previous order by releasing a fresh video containing his controversial “sharbat jihad” remarks against Hamdard’s iconic Rooh Afza drink. Justice Amit Bansal, presiding over the case, remarked that Ramdev “lives in his own world” and “is not in control of anyone,” finding him in prima facie contempt of court.
Background of the Dispute
The controversy began last month when Ramdev, while promoting Patanjali’s rose sharbat, claimed on social media that proceeds from Hamdard’s Rooh Afza were being used to build madrasas and mosques. He went on to label the product as part of a so-called “sharbat jihad,” drawing parallels to the term “love jihad.” Ramdev asserted, “If you drink that sharbat, madrasas and mosques will be built. But if you drink this Patanjali’s rose sharbat, gurukuls will be built, Acharya Kulam will be developed, Patanjali University will expand and the Bharatiya Shiksha Board will grow”.
These remarks provoked widespread outrage and led Hamdard National Foundation (India) to file a petition against Ramdev and Patanjali Foods Ltd, seeking removal of all such videos and advertisements from social media and public platforms. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Hamdard, argued that Ramdev’s comments went beyond product disparagement and amounted to hate speech, creating communal rifts.
Court’s Previous Orders and Ramdev’s Undertaking
On April 22, the Delhi High Court had sharply criticized Ramdev’s “sharbat jihad” remarks, stating they “shocked the conscience of the court” and were “indefensible.” The court ordered Ramdev to take down all related videos and social media posts immediately and submit an affidavit pledging not to make further such statements about competitors’ products.
Ramdev’s counsel assured the court that all advertisements and videos would be removed and that the yoga guru would refrain from making similar remarks in the future.
Fresh Violation and Court’s Reaction
Despite these assurances, Hamdard’s counsel informed the court on Thursday that a new video containing similar communal remarks had gone viral. Justice Bansal, upon reviewing the situation, said, “In view of the last order, his affidavit as well as this video are prima facie in contempt. I will issue a contempt notice now. We are just calling him here”.
The court emphasized that Ramdev’s repeated actions demonstrated disregard for judicial orders and a lack of accountability. “He is not in control of anyone. He lives in his own world,” Justice Bansal observed, indicating the seriousness with which the court views the violation.
What’s Next?
The High Court is set to issue a formal contempt notice to Ramdev and has summoned him for further proceedings. The case highlights growing judicial concern over the use of communal rhetoric in commercial promotions and the need for strict compliance with court directives in high-profile disputes.
Baba Ramdev faces contempt proceedings in the Delhi High Court for defying an earlier gag order and releasing another video with “sharbat jihad” remarks targeting Hamdard’s Rooh Afza. The court has taken a stern view, calling his conduct “shocking” and “indefensible,” and is moving forward with contempt action to enforce judicial discipline and curb communal rhetoric in advertising.
