Summary: This article examines the reach of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, through the lens of key judicial pronouncements – from the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hamdard Dawakhana upholding the constitutionality of advertising restrictions to the Bombay High Court’s broad reading of Section 4 as a catch-all prohibition against misleading drug advertisements and the Supreme Court’s recent observations in the Patanjali matter. These rulings map the boundaries of what constitutes a prohibited advertisement and identify the penal consequences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 Act and the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, for non-compliance with the Advisory.