Introduction: Is Patanjali Still the People’s Brand?
Patanjali Ayurved, once hailed as a transformative force in the Indian FMCG and wellness market, rose to fame by championing the ideals of Swadeshi economics, Ayurvedic healing, and affordable wellness for the masses. Co-founded by yoga guru Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, the brand tapped into a growing nationalistic sentiment and positioned itself as a natural, indigenous alternative to multinational giants like Unilever and Nestlé. Millions of Indians embraced Patanjali as more than just a company—it became a movement symbolizing cultural revival and economic self-reliance.
However, in recent years, this carefully cultivated image has begun to unravel. The company has found itself embroiled in a series of legal disputes, regulatory warnings, and public controversies—ranging from misleading medical claims to communal ad campaigns. What was once celebrated as a “people’s brand” now faces criticism not only from regulators and medical associations, but also from consumers and civil society groups concerned about transparency, ethics, and safety.
With founder Ramdev Baba frequently making unscientific health claims, and the brand being reprimanded by courts for breaching advertising standards, questions about its credibility are growing louder. The Supreme Court’s recent intervention, involving contempt proceedings against Patanjali for deceptive advertisements, underscores a broader shift: the erosion of public trust in a brand that once symbolized purity and patriotism.
The Fall from Grace: A Timeline of Patanjali’s Legal Woes
Patanjali’s recent history is marred by an increasing number of legal challenges, particularly for misleading advertisements and false medical claims Ramdev’s Controversial Remarks and the “Sharbat Jihad” Ad
In a major blow, the Delhi High Court recently reprimanded Ramdev Baba over a controversial advertisement targeting Rooh Afza, falsely claiming that proceeds from its sales were used to fund religious institutions. The court described the claims as “misleading and harmful to public trust” and demanded an official apology.
COVID-19 “Cure” Fiasco: Coronil Claims Backfire
In 2020, Patanjali claimed its product Coronil could cure COVID-19. Despite receiving massive media attention, the claim was quickly debunked by health authorities. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) condemned the move, calling it “a blatant violation of medical ethics.”
Expert Insight: “Making therapeutic claims without clinical trials is not only illegal, but also dangerous,” says Dr. Randeep Guleria, former AIIMS Director.
Patanjali Legal Cases: Highlighting the Brand’s Regulatory Violations
Patanjali’s troubles extend far beyond public perception—its actions have attracted regulatory and judicial scrutiny across multiple fronts. Authorities including the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and the Drugs Controller General of India (DCGI) have flagged numerous Patanjali products for non-compliance with food and drug safety laws.
Legal experts point to the brand’s repeated violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, which prohibits the advertisement of products claiming to treat specific serious conditions like diabetes, cancer, and asthma. Yet Patanjali has faced multiple complaints for marketing such claims without scientific validation or proper clinical testing.
There have also been intellectual property disputes, with several companies accusing Patanjali of trademark violations or deceptive packaging designed to imitate competitors. The volume and variety of these legal challenges suggest a pattern of regulatory negligence rather than isolated incidents.
Below are some of the major legal cases involving Patanjali that have contributed to the erosion of public trust:
| Case | Details | Status |
| Coronil COVID-19 Claim | Unauthorized drug promotion, misleading consumers | Under litigation |
| Rooh Afza “Sharbat Jihad” Ad | Hate speech, misleading advertisement | Apology issued |
| False Ayurvedic Product Claims | Claimed healing properties without scientific validation | Warning issued by FSSAI |
| Trademark Infringement Cases | Multiple legal battles with FMCG and pharma companies | Ongoing |
Why Public Trust Matters in Ayurveda and Wellness
The Ayurvedic wellness industry thrives on trust, tradition, and perceived purity. Consumers don’t just buy a product—they buy into a lifestyle philosophy rooted in nature and time-tested remedies. That makes ethical marketing and scientific transparency non-negotiable. When brands like Patanjali, with massive public influence, exploit that trust, it damages more than just their reputation—it casts doubt over the entire Ayurvedic system.
As Dr. A. K. Seth, a former advisor to the Ministry of AYUSH, notes:
“Ayurveda depends on patient faith and long-term healing. Misleading claims by large players endanger this fragile trust and invite unnecessary skepticism of the entire practice.”
Trust is especially critical as Ayurvedic products are often not subject to the same clinical trial protocols as modern pharmaceuticals. That makes transparency, honesty in labeling, and regulatory compliance even more essential.
Marketing Ethics and the Responsibility of Influencers
Ramdev Baba is not just the face of Patanjali—he is its ideological force and primary marketing vehicle. His dual role as a spiritual leader and corporate figure gives him immense influence, but it also raises ethical red flags. When Ramdev makes unverified health claims—such as his assertion that allopathy is “a stupid science”—it blurs the boundary between personal belief and corporate accountability.
This has become a legal issue as well. In 2023 and 2024, the Supreme Court admonished Patanjali for repeatedly violating court orders and misleading the public through advertisements. The Court emphasized that freedom of speech does not allow commercial entities to misinform the public, especially on health matters.
For digital marketers and influencers in India, the Patanjali case is becoming a legal precedent under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, particularly regarding surrogate advertising and exaggerated health benefit claims.
Consumers Speak: Declining Brand Loyalty
Once a beloved household name, Patanjali is now facing visible erosion in consumer trust. Social media sentiment has shifted notably, with many users reporting disappointment over declining product quality, lack of transparency, and overhyped claims.
Recent consumer surveys indicate:
- A drop in repeat purchases of staple products like toothpaste, herbal oils, and packaged foods.
- Growing complaints about inconsistent packaging, reduced effectiveness, and label discrepancies.
- Migration toward local organic brands or trusted multinational options, especially among urban consumers.
Testimonials like this one from Mumbai homemaker Shruti Malhotra are becoming common:
“I used to swear by Patanjali. But after seeing them make fake COVID claims, I just couldn’t trust their products anymore. Now I use certified organic brands with transparent sourcing.”
Media & Investigative Reports Validate Concerns
Over the past five years, numerous independent journalists and consumer watchdogs have published reports uncovering patterned regulatory non-compliance by Patanjali. These include:
- Selling food products past expiry dates
- Using misleading comparative advertising
- Operating under licenses that were later suspended
Sprouts News, The Caravan, and multiple health blogs have consistently raised questions about the company’s aggressive growth strategies, pricing models, and the ethical boundaries it crosses to stay in the limelight. Their findings are now being corroborated by judicial statements and regulatory crackdowns—validating years of investigative concern.
What Does the Future Hold for Patanjali?
Patanjali still has a loyal rural customer base and significant infrastructure advantages, including retail presence and brand recall. However, the brand is at a crossroads.
If legal cases lead to major license suspensions or financial penalties, and consumer boycotts intensify, Patanjali could face a sharp decline in market dominance. Moreover, with competitors like Dabur, Himalaya, and new D2C organic brands maintaining a clean image, consumers now have credible alternatives that don’t carry the same baggage.
Industry analysts warn that unless Patanjali overhauls its compliance framework, separates spiritual ideology from corporate communication, and recommits to transparent product development, its long-term sustainability may be in jeopardy.
Conclusion: Is It Time to Re-Evaluate the Patanjali Promise?
The question is no longer “Can Patanjali recover?” but “Will they change?”
The Indian public is watching closely. In a world where transparency, ethics, and quality matter more than ever, Patanjali must decide whether to be a cautionary tale or a case study in redemption.
What’s your opinion on Patanjali’s public trust issues? 💬 Leave a comment below, share this article, or check out our full coverage on the Sharbat Jihad ad controversy.
