Was apology published in newspapers? SC asks IMA chief

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked Indian Medical Association president RV Asokan whether his unconditional apology to the apex court over his "damaging" statements in an interview with PTI was published in all those newspapers which carried his interview.

In the interview, where he had answered queries about Patanjali Ayurved Ltd's misleading advertisements case, Asokan had said it was "unfortunate" that the Supreme Court criticised the association and also some of the practices of private doctors.

The court also observed that the apology needs to be published in the newspapers by Asokan personally and not from the funds of the IMA.

The top court is hearing a plea filed in 2022 by the IMA alleging a smear campaign by Patanjali against the COVID-19 vaccination drive and modern systems of medicine.

On July 9, Asokan had told the apex court that his unconditional apology to the court was published in various publications.

The IMA's counsel had said that Asokan's unconditional apology was published in the association's monthly publication, on the IMA website, as also by PTI.

During the hearing on Tuesday, a bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta told the IMA's counsel that the apology should have been published in all those newspapers where Asokan's interview was carried.

"Was it published in all those newspapers where your interview was published," the bench asked, adding that the IMA president was inviting trouble.

Senior advocate P S Patwalia, appearing for the IMA, told the bench that Asokan would take appropriate steps to purge himself of the contempt.

The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on August 27.

In an interaction with PTI editors on April 29 for its programme '@4 Parliament Street,' Asokan had said it was "unfortunate" that the apex court criticised the association and also some of the practices of private doctors.

Asokan was replying to a query about the Supreme Court's observations during a hearing on April 23, when it had said while it was pointing one finger at Patanjali, the remaining four fingers were pointed towards IMA.

During the hearing on May 14, the bench had posed some tough questions to Asokan over his "damaging" statements against the court in the interview and said, "You cannot sit on a couch giving an interview to the press and lampooning the court."

The court had then made it clear that it will not accept his affidavit tendering apology at that stage.

Expressing displeasure over Asokan's comments a day before the top court was slated to the hear the matter, it had sought his response on an application filed by Patanjali Ayurved Ltd, which had urged the court to take judicial notice of the statements made by him.