New Delhi: On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court expressed strong disapproval of Ramdev, the founder of Patanjali and a prominent yoga guru, regarding his contentious remarks about “Sharbat Jihad,” which were allegedly directed at Hamdard’s well-known beverage, Rooh Afza. The court deemed these comments “indefensible” and stated that they “shock the conscience of the court.”
Justice Amit Bansal made this pointed observation while presiding over a lawsuit filed by Hamdard Laboratories against Ramdev. The company accused him of making defamatory and communal remarks aimed at its product.
On April 3, Ramdev criticized Hamdard’s Rooh Afza, alleging that the company was using its profits to fund the construction of mosques and madrasas. Following these statements, Hamdard sought legal recourse from the Delhi High Court, as reported by Bar and Bench.
Mukul Rohatgi, a senior advocate representing Hamdard, stated, “This case is alarming and transcends mere disparagement. It constitutes an attempt to incite communal division, similar to hate speech, and will not be shielded by defamation laws.”
“This should not be tolerated even for a moment. We face enough challenges in this country,” Rohatgi was quoted as saying by Bar and Bench.
The high court has deferred the matter and instructed Ramdev’s legal counsel to be present for future proceedings, as reported.
In response to the backlash, Ramdev defended his comments during a media briefing on Friday, asserting that he did not mention any specific brand or community.
“I did not name anyone, but the Rooh Afza representatives interpreted ‘sharbat jihad’ as a personal attack… this implies they are engaging in this ‘jihad’,” Ramdev stated.
“If they are committed to Islam and are constructing mosques and madrasas, they should take pride in that. However, those who follow Sanatan Dharma should be aware… If anyone has an issue with this, so be it,” he added.
In a related development, senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh has approached law enforcement to file an FIR against Ramdev, accusing him of inciting religious animosity through his alleged comments on “sharbat jihad.”
