The Madras High Court has ruled against quashing a criminal case against a Siddha doctor, S Sindhu, for illegally stocking allopathic medicines without a valid license in her clinic. While the court acknowledged that Siddha practitioners are not prohibited from practicing modern scientific medicine, it highlighted that the case in question did not pertain to the doctor’s right to practice, but to a violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
Justice G Jayachandran, who presided over the case, underscored that the offense was related to the unauthorized stocking and sale of allopathic medicines, which is strictly regulated under Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The judge, therefore, dismissed the doctor’s plea, which had sought to quash the pending criminal case, directing the trial court to resolve the matter promptly.
The legal case stems from a 2017 incident when officials from the drugs control department inspected Sindhu’s clinic following a complaint. During the inspection, the assistant director of drugs control discovered allopathic medicines in her possession, which allegedly violated the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The findings led to the registration of a criminal case against her, which she later contested.
In her defense, Sindhu, a registered Siddha practitioner, argued that the State government had previously declared that medical practitioners with qualifications under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, and the Tamil Nadu Siddha System of Medicine (Development and Registration of Practitioners) Act, 1997, are permitted to practice modern medicine. According to her, prescribing and possessing small quantities of allopathic medicine for clinical purposes was within her legal rights. She further asserted that having a minimal amount of allopathic drugs in her clinic did not amount to selling them and should not constitute an offense.
However, Justice Jayachandran dismissed these claims, emphasizing that the legal issue at hand was not her authority to practice modern medicine, but rather the illegal stocking and sale of drugs without a proper license. He stated that Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act mandates that any medical practitioner or establishment stocking allopathic drugs must have a valid license, irrespective of their right to practice. The law is designed to regulate the safe distribution and sale of medicines, ensuring that they are only sold through licensed and authorized channels.
The court’s decision reinforces the strict regulations surrounding the stocking and sale of pharmaceutical products and the importance of adhering to legal requirements in the medical field. While practitioners of traditional medicine, such as Siddha, may have the legal backing to incorporate elements of modern medicine into their practice, they are still bound by the laws governing the handling of pharmaceuticals.
With this ruling, the case against Sindhu will continue in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, where the trial court is expected to bring the matter to a swift conclusion.
(Input from various sources)
(Rehash/Ankur Deka)
