The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Union ministries of Law, Health and Ayush on a plea seeking a direction to declare AYUSH doctors “Registered Medical Practitioners” under the law, placing them on par with allopathic doctors.
The public interest litigation also sought the constitution of an expert committee to review and update the schedule of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, arguing that the law must reflect present-day scientific developments.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took note of submissions by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, appearing for the petitioner, a law student identified as his son, Nitin Upadhyay, and issued notice on the plea.
“Is he your son?” the Chief Justice asked.
“Yes,” Upadhyay replied.
“We thought he will get some gold medal etc. but he is filing PILs now. Why don't you study now? … Issue notice. Only for your son. So that he studies well,” the bench remarked.
The plea seeks a declaration that AYUSH doctors fall within the definition of “registered medical practitioners” under Section 2(cc) of the 1954 Act.
The Act is aimed at controlling the advertisement of drugs in certain cases, to prohibit the advertisement for certain purposes of remedies alleged to possess magic qualities.
Section 2 (cc) of the Act deals with definition of 'registered medical practitioner'.
"The Act was enacted to protect the public from false and misleading medical advertisements. However, Section 3(d) places a complete ban on advertisements relating to certain diseases and conditions," the plea said.
Section 3 of the Act deals with prohibition of advertisement of certain drugs for treatment of certain diseases and disorders.
It said as AYUSH doctors and other genuine non-allopathic registered medical practitioners are not covered under the exception of section 14 of the Act, "this blanket ban effectively stops the advertisement by them of the existence of medication for serious ailments, leading to widespread public ignorance of the drugs".
The plea, filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, said section 3(d) of the Act imposes a "complete and blanket ban" on advertisements relating to certain diseases and conditions without distinguishing between misleading advertisements and truthful, scientific and lawful information.
It said the right to information to be cognisant of the diagnosis, prevention, mitigation, cure and treatment of life-threatening chronic diseases has been overridden by a grossly disproportionate prohibition of advertisements through an "archaic law".
"It is humbly submitted that the initial aim of the Act to put an immediate ban over harmful advertisements has devolved into a blanket ban on all genuine medical advertisements by non-allopathic (AYUSH) doctors," it said.
The plea said advertisements relating to drugs and remedies, when truthful, scientifically backed, and non-deceptive, constitute legitimate dissemination of information to consumers and patients.
It has sought a direction to the Centre to "constitute an 'expert committee' to review, revise and update the schedule of the DMR Act in accordance with present-day scientific developments and evidence-based medical knowledge". PTI SJK SJK DV DV
Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.
