Delhi High Court Seeks Baba Ramdev's Reply To Doctors' Suit Over Remarks On Allopathy

Shrutika Pandey

30 July 2021 4:46 PM GMT

  • Delhi High Court Seeks Baba Ramdevs Reply To Doctors Suit Over Remarks On Allopathy

    The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice to Yoga guru Baba Ramdev in a suit filed against him by several doctors' associations for allegedly spreading misinformation about COVID cure through his statements against allopathySenior Advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for the plaintiffs, argued that the fundamental grievances are : (a) the defendant Ramdev, not being a medical practitioner, is...

    The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice to Yoga guru Baba Ramdev in a suit filed against him by several doctors' associations for allegedly spreading misinformation about COVID cure through his statements against allopathy

    Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for the plaintiffs, argued that the fundamental grievances are : (a) the defendant Ramdev, not being a medical practitioner, is not authorized to advise medicines in the alternative; (b) he projects CORONIL, an unlicensed drug, as a COVID cure, posing a danger to public health; and (c) the defendant is in the habit of making such oversweeping and unfounded claims, whereby he claimed to have found a cure for AIDS and Cancer in lieu to serve a particular commercial interest.

    A bench of Justice C Harishankar issued notice to Ramdev and sought his reply to an application filed by plaintiffs seeking leave under Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure (which enables parties to file a joint suit on an issue of public nuisance).

    Senior Sibal contended that there is no provision to object to the grant of leave. It is to be granted solely based on averments made in the petition. He also added that an appeal could lie only against an order refusing to grant leave and not otherwise.

    Relying on Bijay Shankar Halwasiya Etc vs Bhiwani Sudhar & Vikas Samiti & Ors (2015), Advocate Akhil Sibal averred,

    "We are at a stage of leave, which should go by the plaint. At the stage of leave, only the plaint is to be looked at, what response are they going to file. It is between me and the Court."

    However, the Court opined that if the leave is granted without the reply, the defendant might later apply for revocation of the same. The judge said that he cannot grant leave without giving an opportunity to the defendant to respond.

    The case is posted to August 10 for Ramdev's reply.

    FIRs have also been filed against Ramdev in Bihar and Chhattisgarh over his remarks against Allopathy on complaints filed by Indian Medical Association. He has approached the Supreme Court seeking the clubbing of the FIRs.


    Title: Resident Doctors Association, AIIMS (Rishikesh) & Ors. v. Ram Kishan Yadav alias Swami Ramdev & Ors.


    Next Story