Thread by @LiveLawIndia

#SupremeCourt hears Indian Medical Association's plea concerning misleading claims and advertisements against "Allopathic" medicine.

Bench: Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice KV Vishwanathan.

In March, the Court passed various directions to State governments for effective implementation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954

livelaw.in/top-stories/mi…

J Nagarathna: now the original grievance has been addressed. So we will close the petition.

Advocate Archana Pathak Dave: I am seeking vacation of stay on omission of Rule 170.
livelaw.in/top-stories/su…

Amicus Curiae Shadan Farasat: In reality Rule 170 brings Ayurveda in line with allopathy.

Counsel: the regular drugs are tested and approvals are given. Here there is no approval and they will say this will cure diabetes etc. There are millions of people who are illiterate and go for it. Look at the misuse. That is why the Court said that this is contrary to our directions. If you repeat this will cause havoc.

Farasat: a lot as happened since the 27 August 2024 order imposing the stay. Justice Oka presided over this matter. The states have been implementing the Rule

J Vishwanathan: can it be implemented when it has been omitted?

J Nagarathna: so long as they are allowed to manufacture it how can you later say that don't advertise?

Advocate Pranav Sachdeva: people spend several years going after these and realise there is no such remedy.

J Nagarathna: then manufacture itself should be banned?

Farasat: the Court has passed several orders and now there is regime for implementation of rule 170. It has been done with a lot of effort by the court. That should not be undermined.

J Nagarathna: once you allow manufacture, the advertisement is a natural business practice.

Farasat: it is about the purpose of the advertisement. It can be a supplement or it can be for a treatment of different things that is the distinction.

Sachdeva: it may be a good supplement, a good product, but to advertise it as a cure for a disease may not be in the best interest because there are large number of people who are gullible

J Nagarathna: there is a Ministry of AYUSH, no?

We will dispose of the matters, keep all the contentions open and vacate the interim order reserving liberty to all parties.

Order: it is not in dispute that the object and purpose as well as the relief sought for by the petitioner IMA in this petition has been achieved by the various orders passed by this court.

Order: during the pendency of this writ petition the respondent Ministry of AYUSH by notification dated 1st July 2024 issued the Drugs (Fourth Amendment) Rules which omitted Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945.

However thereafter subsequently this court by its order dated 27th August 2024 had stayed the said notification.

Order: The amicus curiae submitted that as a result the said Rule is still in force and various compliances have been made pursuant to the said Rule by respective parties. In the circumstances the writ petition may be continued for the purposes of compliance even though the original purpose for which the writ petition was filed has been achieved.

Order: The prayers sought for have been achieved in as much as the reliefs have been granted by the court. We find that no object and purpose would be served in considering the petition any further. Hence the writ petition stands disposed of.

Order: However liberty is reserved to the parties/intervention applicants to seek relief in accordance with law if they have any grievance with regard to the omission of Rule 170. Consequently the interim order dated 27th August 2024 stands vacated. All contentions are left open to be agitated in any other proceeding.