In a blistering rebuke, the Delhi High Court took strong exception to Baba Ramdev’s recent remarks branding Hamdard’s Rooh Afza as part of a so-called “Sharbat Jihad.” The court, visibly perturbed by the communal undertones, declared the statements “indefensible” and “shocking to the conscience.”
The drama unfolded during an early hearing on a defamation suit filed by Hamdard National Foundation India against Patanjali Foods and its founder. The trigger? A viral video from April 3, where Ramdev, while promoting his own Gulaab Sharbat, accused Hamdard of funneling profits into mosques and madrasas, all under the loaded term “sharbat jihad.”
Justice Amit Bansal didn’t mince words. The court signaled it was prepared to pass a severe order, demanding Ramdev’s counsel stay present and take clear instructions. “It shocks the conscience of the court,” the judge stated, sounding a judicial alarm bell.
Representing Hamdard, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi pulled no punches either. “This isn’t just disparagement—it’s inciting division, it’s hate speech,” he told the bench, urging swift action. Rohatgi argued that Ramdev’s attack wasn’t just about business rivalry, but a targeted communal provocation, even extending to another brand, Himalaya, allegedly for similar reasons.
“This needs to be nipped in the bud. We don’t need more fire in this already smoldering house,” he added grimly.
Notably, Ramdev has previously come under the Supreme Court’s scanner for his attacks on allopathy, an episode Rohatgi referenced with a hint of irony: “Back then, he admitted he was on the wrong side.”
This time, the stakes appear higher. The court isn’t just dealing with hurt commercial interests—it’s weighing speech that, if left unchecked, could poison the public square.
