Delhi High Court slams yoga guru Ramdev over 'Sharbat Jihad' remark targeting Rooh Afza
PTC Web Desk: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday strongly criticised yoga guru and Patanjali co-founder Ramdev for his recent comments that indirectly targeted the iconic drink Rooh Afza. During a hearing on a plea filed by Hamdard Laboratories, the makers of Rooh Afza, the court described Ramdev’s statements as “indefensible” and said they “shock the conscience of the court.”
The controversy began earlier this month when Ramdev launched Patanjali’s new rose-flavored sharbat. While promoting the product, he appeared to take an indirect jab at Hamdard’s Rooh Afza, stating, “There’s a company that sells sharbat, but the money earned from it goes into building madrasas and mosques.” Without explicitly naming Hamdard, his comments were widely perceived as a veiled attack on Rooh Afza.
He further added, “If you drink that sharbat, madrasas and mosques will be built. But if you drink this [Patanjali’s sharbat], it will support the development of gurukuls, Acharya Kulam, Patanjali University, and the Bharatiya Shiksha Board.”
Escalating the controversy, Ramdev reportedly said, “Just like love jihad, this is a kind of sharbat jihad. To protect yourself from sharbat jihad, this message must reach everyone.” The remarks sparked widespread criticism and prompted Hamdard to move the High Court.
Representing Hamdard, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that the statements amounted to more than simple brand disparagement. “This goes beyond defamation—it promotes communal division and borders on hate speech,” he told the court.
Patanjali’s official social media accounts added fuel to the fire by sharing content comparing other brands' sharbats to toilet cleaners, warning the public to “protect your family and children from the poison of toilet cleaners being sold as soft drinks and sharbat jihad.” They urged consumers to opt only for Patanjali’s beverages.
This isn't the first time yoga guru Ramdev and his company Patanjali have faced legal trouble. Over the past two years, the brand has encountered multiple lawsuits over allegedly misleading advertisements. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) also filed a case against Patanjali, which led to the Supreme Court imposing a temporary ban on its ads and issuing contempt notices.
Earlier in January, a court in Kerala issued bailable warrants against both Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna for failing to appear in court in connection with misleading advertisements by Divya Pharmacy. A similar case is also pending in Kozhikode.
- With inputs from agencies
