• Delhi High Court is considering a contempt notice against Baba Ramdev for allegedly violating a previous order regarding disparaging remarks against Hamdard's Rooh Afza.
• The court ordered Ramdev to remove the offensive portion of the new video from all social media platforms within 24 hours.
• Hamdard's counsel argued that Ramdev's actions constitute contempt of court and promote communal division, while Ramdev's counsel maintained he was expressing his opinions.

The Delhi High Court is hearing a plea filed by Hamdard National Foundation India against Baba Ramdev and his Patanjali Foods Ltd. The dispute originated from Ramdev's remarks allegedly targeting Hamdard's Rooh Afza, referring to it as 'sharbat jihad'. Despite an earlier undertaking to refrain from making similar statements, Ramdev released a new video which Hamdard claims contains objectionable content. The court has expressed strong disapproval of Ramdev's actions and is considering further legal action, including a contempt notice.

• What: Baba Ramdev allegedly released a new video containing disparaging remarks against Hamdard's Rooh Afza, violating a previous court order.
• Who: Key individuals include Justice Amit Bansal, Baba Ramdev, and lawyers Sandeep Sethi, Rajiv Nayar, and Jayant Mehta. Organizations involved are Hamdard National Foundation India and Patanjali Foods Ltd.
• When: The new video was released after an April 22 court order. The court hearing took place on Thursday, May 1 (or May 2 depending on the article). The deadline for removing the video was within 24 hours of the court's order.
• Where: The legal proceedings are taking place in the Delhi High Court. The videos were disseminated through social media platforms.

The case highlights the tension between freedom of expression and the potential for disparagement and communal incitement. The Delhi High Court is taking a firm stance against what it perceives as a deliberate violation of its orders. Ramdev's defense hinges on the argument that he is merely expressing his opinions, while Hamdard argues that his remarks are targeted, defamatory, and promote religious division. The court's strong language suggests it is likely to pursue contempt charges if Ramdev does not fully comply with the order to remove the offensive content and refrain from similar statements in the future. The request for a Rs 2 crore damage claim shows the severity of Hamdard's position.

"I think he (Ramdev) is beyond your control."

"He (Ramdev) is not in control of anyone. He lives in his own world."

"This shows the falsity of his affidavit in which he stated that he was a law-abiding citizen and strictly upholds the law of the land."

"Jaise love jihad, vote jihad chal raha hai naa, waise sharbat jihad bhi chal raha hai (Like there is love jihad and vote jihad, there is sharbat jihad),"

The Delhi High Court's strong reprimand and consideration of contempt charges against Baba Ramdev demonstrate the seriousness of the alleged violation of its previous order. The case underscores the importance of adhering to court directives and avoiding disparaging remarks that could incite communal division. The removal of the offensive video is a necessary step, but the court's final decision will determine the long-term consequences of Ramdev's actions and set a precedent for similar cases in the future.