The Delhi High Court on Thursday pulled up Patanjali Ayurved over its recent chyawanprash advertisement that described rival products as “dhokha” — meaning “fraud” or “deception.” The court observed that while a company is free to claim its product is superior, it cannot disparage or malign others in the process.
Justice Tejas Karia, hearing a plea filed by Dabur India seeking an injunction against Patanjali’s ad campaign titled “51 herbs. 1 truth. Patanjali Chyawanprash!”, remarked, “You can claim that you are the best, but you cannot call others dhokha. The word dhokha means fraud and deception. You may want to use another word.” The court subsequently reserved its order on Dabur’s plea.
Dabur, the market leader in chyawanprash with more than 60 per cent share, argued that Patanjali’s advertisement was defamatory and misleading, harming both its reputation and consumer trust. Representing Dabur, senior advocate Sandeep Sethi contended that the ad discredited the entire class of chyawanprash manufacturers. “The advertisement calls chyawanprash itself deceptive, not just one brand. When a market leader is being targeted in this way, it affects the entire segment,” Sethi said.
He highlighted that Patanjali’s line — “Why settle with 40 herbs?” — was a direct reference to Dabur’s chyawanprash, which is known to use 40 herbs. “The line dhokha khao implies consumers are being deceived. Coming from a self-proclaimed yoga guru makes it worse. People associate him with truth and authenticity,” Sethi argued.
In the 25-second commercial, a woman is seen feeding chyawanprash to her child and saying, “Chalo, dhokha khao,” after which Baba Ramdev appears on screen, saying, “Adhikansh log chyawanprash ke naam par dhokha kha rahe hain.”
Responding to the allegations, senior advocate Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Patanjali, defended the advertisement by saying the company did not intend to suggest deceit or fraud. “When I say dhokha, I don’t mean fraud. I mean ordinary — ineffective. I’m merely saying that Patanjali is special, while others are sadharan (ordinary),” he argued.
The court, however, disagreed with this interpretation. Justice Karia pointed out that dhokha carries a negative connotation. “Dhokha in English means fraud. You can say others are ordinary or that yours is better, but you cannot say others are fraudulent,” he said.
The judge observed that comparative advertising is permissible under the law so long as it doesn’t cross into disparagement. “You can praise your own product, but you cannot degrade others,” Justice Karia said, indicating that Patanjali’s wording may have crossed that line.
This isn’t the first time Patanjali has faced judicial scrutiny over its advertising. In July 2024, another single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court had ordered the company to delete the first two lines of a chyawanprash advertisement that said, “Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?” The decision was later upheld by a division bench, which directed Patanjali to remove the “offending portion.”
The latest controversy reignites a long-running legal battle between Dabur and Patanjali, two of India’s biggest FMCG players in the Ayurvedic segment. The court’s final ruling on whether the dhokha advertisement constitutes disparagement is now awaited.
