The Delhi High Court came down heavily on yoga guru Ramdev over his controversial remarks against Hamdard’s popular drink, Rooh Afza. Criticising his statements as "indefensible," the court said, "It shocks the conscience of the court." 

The controversy began on April 3, when Ramdev alleged that the profits from Hamdard’s Rooh Afza were being used to build mosques and madrasas. "There’s a company that gives you sharbat, but the money it earns is used to construct madrasas and mosques," he claimed during a public event.

Taking the promotion of his own brand forward, Ramdev said, "If you drink that sharbat, madrasas and mosques will be built. But if you drink this [referring to Patanjali’s rose sharbat], gurukuls will be built, Acharya Kulam will be developed, Patanjali University will expand, and the Bharatiya Shiksha Board will grow.”

Following these remarks, Hamdard approached the Delhi High Court against Ramdev. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Hamdard, told the court, "This is a case which is shocking, which goes beyond disparagement. This is a case of creating a communal divide, akin to hate speech. It will not have protection from the law of defamation."

In another controversial statement, Ramdev drew a parallel between 'love jihad' and Rooh Afza, saying, "Just like there is love jihad, this is also a kind of sharbat jihad. To protect yourself from this sharbat jihad, this message must reach everyone."

Taking his criticism further, he compared other sharbat brands to 'toilet cleaners'. A post shared by Patanjali on social media urged consumers, "Protect your family and innocent children from the poison of toilet cleaners being sold in the name of soft drinks and sharbat jihad. Bring home only Patanjali sharbat and juices."

This incident adds to a growing list of controversies involving Ramdev and Patanjali. Over the past two years, Patanjali has faced multiple legal challenges, particularly for misleading advertisements. The matter drew national attention when the Indian Medical Association (IMA) filed a case against Patanjali, leading the Supreme Court to temporarily ban its ads and issue contempt of court notices.

In January, a Kerala court also issued bailable warrants against Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna for failing to appear in a case related to misleading ads by Divya Pharmacy. A similar case was also filed in Kozhikode.