Holding

The Supreme Court held that while advertisement by homeopathic practitioners is prohibited, the High Court’s direction to invoke the Disaster Management Act for any prescription beyond the AYUSH advisory was ultra vires; practitioners may prescribe as per the advisory and guidelines but cannot claim a cure for COVID‑19.

Summary

An advocate filed a writ petition in the Kerala High Court seeking a direction that the Ministry of AYUSH’s advisory dated 06‑03‑2020 be implemented, allowing homeopathic practitioners to treat COVID‑19 patients. The High Court held that any advertisement or claim of cure by AYUSH doctors, except those specified in the advisory, would attract action under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and noted that advertisement by homeopathic practitioners is prohibited under the Homeopathic Practitioners Regulations, 1982. The appellant, Dr. AKB Sadbhavana Mission School of Homeo Pharmacy, not a party to the writ, appealed to the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s paragraph‑14 direction. The Supreme Court affirmed that advertisement is prohibited but held that the High Court’s direction to invoke the Disaster Management Act for any prescription beyond the advisory was beyond its jurisdiction. It clarified that the AYUSH advisory permits homeopathic practitioners to prescribe for preventive, prophylactic, symptom‑management and as an add‑on to conventional care, but they cannot claim a cure for COVID‑19. The Court modified the High Court’s direction accordingly and disposed of the appeal.

Issues considered

The High Court’s authority to direct action under the Disaster Management Act against homeopathic practitioners for prescribing beyond the AYUSH advisory.
Whether homeopathic practitioners may advertise or claim cure for COVID‑19.
Interpretation of the AYUSH advisory dated 06‑03‑2020 and subsequent guidelines concerning the role of homeopathy in COVID‑19 management.
The applicability of the Homeopathic Practitioners (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982 to advertising by homeopathic doctors.

Legislation cited

Disaster Management Act, 2005
Homeopathic Practitioners (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982
Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973s. Section 24, s. Section 33

Subjects

HomeopathyAYUSHCOVID‑19Disaster Management Actadvertisement prohibitionmedical regulationSupreme Courtwrit petitionguidelines

Judgment

1074 [2020] REPORTS
SUPREME COURT 13 S.C.R. 1074 [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION
SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY
V.
THE SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF AYUSH & ORS.
B
(Civil Appeal No. 4049 of 2020)
DECEMBER 15, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
C
COVID-19: Homeopathic Medicine System – Writ petition filed
before High Court by an Advocate praying for direction to the
Department of AYUSH to ensure that the Homeopathic practitioners
are immediately allowed to perform in accordance with advisory
dated 06.03.2020 issued by Department of AYUSH – Petitioner
D pleaded that to control the spread of COVID-19, advisory dated
06.03.2020 was issued in which it was pointed out that interventions
under AYUSH systems have been varyingly used for making an
effective public health response in similar situations faced in many
States/Union Territories earlier, however, the State of Kerala and
the Department of AYUSH, Trivandrum did not take steps to
E
implement the said advisory – High Court while disposing of writ
petition, held that the advisory of the Ministry of AYUSH is being
followed by the Government and tablets are given free of cost to
people as immunity boosters; that as per the State Medical Protocol,
COVID-19 affected persons should not be treated by anybody other
F than the Government and those authorised by the Government and
the doctors practising in AYUSH medicines are not to prescribe any
medicines, stating that it is curative for COVID-19 disease and the
qualified medical AYUSH practitioners can only prescribe immunity
booster mixture or tablets, as suggested by the Ministry of AYUSH
– High Court in paragraph 14 noted that if any qualified doctor
G
practising AYUSH medicine, makes any advertisement or prescribes
any drugs or medicines, as a cure for COVID-19 disease, except
those specifically mentioned in the advisory, it would be open for
the respondents to take appropriate action under the provisions of
the Disaster Management Act, 2005, and also directed Medical/
H Police Departments to monitor the action of AYUSH medical
1074
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1075
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH

practitioners – Appellant-Homeo Pharmacy who is not party in writ A
petition feeling aggrieved by directions issued by High Court filed
instant appeal – Held: Advertisement by Homeopathic practitioners
is clearly prohibited by the Homeopathic Practitioners (Professional
Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982 – Regn.6
prohibits advertisement for solicitation of patients personally or
B
advertisement in the newspaper by the Homeopathic practitioners
– When statutory regulations itself prohibit advertisement, there is
no occasion for Homeopathic medical practitioners to advertise
that they are competent to cure COVID-19 disease – When the
Scientists of entire world are engaged in research to find out proper
medicine/vaccine for COVID-19, there is no occasion for making C
any observation as contained in paragraph 14 with regard to
Homeopathic medical practitioners – Homeopathy does not cure
the disease, but it cures the patients – Writ petition was filed in High
Court only with a limited relief for issuing direction to respondent
to implement advisory, there was no occasion for High Court to
D
make observations and issue direction as it made in paragraph 14
– High Court did not fully comprehend advisory dated 06.03.2020
and made observations for taking appropriate actions against the
Homeopathic medical practitioners, which is not approved – High
Court, however, was right in its observation that no medical
practitioner can claim that it can cure COVID-19 – There is no E
such claim in other therapy including allopathy – Homeopathy is
contemplated to be used in preventing and mitigating COVID-19 as
is reflected by the advisory and guidelines issued by the Ministry of
AYUSH – The directions issued by High Court in paragraph 14 of
the judgment modified to that extent – Homeopathic medical
F
practitioners to follow advisory dated 06.03.2020 as well as
guidelines for Homeopathic medical practitioners for COVID-19
issued by Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH – Disaster
Management Act, 2005.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
G
HELD: 1. The High Court emphasised that if any qualified
doctor practising AYUSH medicine, makes any advertisement
or prescribes any drugs or medicines, as a cure for COVID-19
disease, except as prescribed in letter dated 6.3.2020, it is open
to the authorities to take appropriate action under the provisions
H
1076 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Insofar as advertisement
by Homeopathic practitioners is concerned, it is clearly prohibited
by the regulations framed in Section 33 read with Section 24 of
Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 namely the Homeopathic
Practitioners (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics)
Regulations, 1982. Regulation 6 prohibits advertisement for
B
solicitation of patients personally or advertisement in the
newspaper by the Homeopathic practitioners. When statutory
regulations itself prohibit advertisement, there is no occasion
for Homeopathic medical practitioners to advertise that they are
competent to cure COVID-19 disease. When the Scientists of
C entire world are engaged in research to find out proper medicine/
vaccine for COVID-19, there is no occasion for making any
observation as contained in paragraph 14 with regard to
Homeopathic medical practitioners. [Paras 18, 19][1085-B-D;
1086-C-D]
D 2. The writ petition, which was filed in the Kerala High
Court only with a limited relief for issuing direction to respondent
to implement advisory dated 06.03.2020 issued by Ministry of
AYUSH, there was no occasion for High Court to make
observations and issue direction as it has been made in paragraph
14. What is permissible for Homeopathic medical practitioner in
E reference to COVID-19 symptomatic and asymptomatic patients
is already regulated by the said advisory and guidelines. The
Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH has also brought on
record the guidelines issued subsequent to 06.03.2020 for
Homeopathy medical practitioners for COVID-19, where
F Homeopathic approach to COVID-19 has been elaborately dealt
with. The said guidelines, which has been issued after 04.04.2020
has been brought on the record as Annexure C by the Ministry
of AYUSH. Guidelines dated 04.04.2020 make it clear that
Homeopathy has been envisaged by the Ministry as the
therapeutic aid. The said guidelines refer to Homeopathy
G medicines as medicines for prophylaxis, Amelioration and
mitigation. The guidelines, however, specifically provides that
“the prescription has to be given only by institutionally qualified
practitioners”. The High Court in its impugned judgment has
not fully comprehended the guidelines dated 06.03.2020 and
H taking a restricted view of the guidelines and have made
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1077
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH

observations for taking appropriate actions against the A
Homeopathic medical practitioners, which cannot be approved.
The High Court, however, is right in its observation that no
medical practitioner can claim that it can cure COVID-19. There
is no such claim in other therapy including allopathy. The High
Court is right in observing that no claim for cure can be made in
B
Homeopathy. The Homeopathy is contemplated to be used in
preventing and mitigating COVID-19 as is reflected by the
advisory and guidelines issued by the Ministry of AYUSH.
[Paras 20, 21, 22, 23][1086-D-F; 1088-G-H; 1089-A-B]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4049
of 2020. C

From the Judgment and Order dated 21.08.2020 of the High Court
of Kerala at Ernakulam in WP (C) No. 9459 of 2020.
Tushar Mehta, SG, Venkita Subramoniam T.R, Rahat Bansal,
Raghvendra S. Srivatsa, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Rajat Nair, Kanu D
Agrawal, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Advs. for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
The application seeking permission to file special leave petition is
E
allowed.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant Dr. AKB Sadbhavana
Mission School of Homeo Pharmacy aggrieved by the part of Division
Bench judgment of Kerala High Court dated 21.08.2020 passed in Writ F
Petition (C) No.9459 of 2020. The appellant, who was not party in the
writ petition feeling aggrieved by certain directions issued by the High
Court have come up in this appeal.
3. We need to notice the contents and prayers of the writ petition
filed in the Kerala High Court by respondent No.4 (proforma respondent). G
The writ petition was filed by respondent No.4, an Advocate praying for
writ of Mandamus or for any other writ or order directing the Secretary,
Department of AYUSH, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum to ensure
that the Homeopathic practitioners are immediately allowed to perform
in accordance with the Exhibit-P1 notification (Guidelines dated
H
1078 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A 06.03.2020 issued by Secretary, Department of AYUSH (Ministry of
Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa and
Homeopathy) (AYUSH, New Delhi).
4. The petitioner’s case in the writ petition is that petitioner is an
ardent admirer of the Homeopathic medicine system, which system of
B medicine in India is controlled and regulated by the Ministry of AYUSH.
The petitioner pleaded that to control the spread of Coronavirus (COVID-
19), notification dated 06.03.2020 was issued by the Secretary, Ministry
of AYUSH to the Chief Secretaries of all States in which notification, it
was pointed out that interventions under AYUSH systems have been
varyingly used for making an effective public health response in similar
C situations faced in many States/Union Territories earlier. The petitioner’s
grievance was that State of Kerala and the Secretary, Department of
AYUSH, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum did not take steps to
implement the advisory dated 06.03.2020 whereas many other State
Governments have taken steps much earlier. The petitioner pleaded that
D Homeopathic system would have been absolutely able to control the
spread of COVID-19 through its immunity boosting medicines. Petitioner
further stated in the writ petition that if the Homeopathic medicines had
been distributed earlier in highly affected pockets and particularly to
those under isolation and quarantine, the explosive situation had not
happened, which has happened in the State of Kerala. The only prayer
E made in the writ petition are to the following effect:-
(i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or Order
directing the third respondent to ensure that the Homeopathic
practitioners are immediately allowed to perform in
accordance with the Exhibit P-1 notification.
F
(ii) To grant such other reliefs as this Honourable Court deems
fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
5. The Division Bench of the High Court disposed of the writ
petition by judgment dated 21.08.2020. The High Court in its judgment
G has extracted advisory dated 06.03.2020 of the Government of India,
Ministry of AYUSH, the Government Order dated 08.04.2020 and
21.04.2020 issued by Government of Kerala and after noticing the
aforesaid, the High Court disposed of the writ petition. In paragraphs 13
and 14 of the judgment, the High Court has stated as follows:-

H
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1079
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

“13. It is the case of the petitioner that Exhibit-P1 has not been A
implemented by the State of Kerala, whereas it is the submission
of learned Senior Government Pleader that Government has
approved the action plan of Homeo Department for giving Homeo
medicines as prophylactic. However, the target population was
not intended to include COVID-19 patients or their contacts or
B
those people, under quarantine. Advisory of the Ministry of
AYUSH is being followed by the Government and tablets are
given free of cost to those persons as immunity boosters. As per
the State Medical Protocol, COVID-19 affected persons should
not be treated by anybody other than the Government and those
authorised by the Government. As per the medical protocol of the C
Government, doctors practising in AYUSH medicines are not
supposed to prescribe any medicines, stating that it is curative for
COVID-19 disease. However, as per the advisory, there is nothing
prohibiting the qualified medical AYUSH practitioners to prescribe
immunity booster mixture or tablets, as suggested by the Ministry
D
of AYUSH, Government of India, New Delhi. When the Central
as well as State Governments have approved prescription of certain
mixtures and tablets, as immunity boosters, qualified medical
practitioners in AYUSH can also prescribe the same, but only as
immunity boosters.
14. We also make it clear that if any qualified doctor practising E
AYUSH medicine, makes any advertisement or prescribes any
drugs or medicines, as a cure for COVID-19 disease, except those
specifically mentioned in Annexure-I advisory to Exhibit-P1 D.O.
letter dated 6.3.2020, it is open for the respondents to take
appropriate action under the provisions of the Disaster F
Management Act, 2005, and the orders of the Governments, both
Central as well as the State, issued from time-to-time. Only those
tablets or mixtures shall be given as immunity booster and not as
cure for COVID-19. AYUSH medical practitioners are further
directed not to violate the Government Order dated 6.3.2020. In
this regard, Medical/Police Departments are also directed to G
monitor the action of AYUSH medical practitioners.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.”
6. The appellant, who was not party to the writ petition, has filed
this appeal and the reasons given for filing this appeal by the appellant as H
1080 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A stated in paragraph 4 of the application seeking permission to file special
leave petition, are as follows:-
“4. It is respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble High Court had
not issued any notice either to Ministry of AYUSH, Government
of India or to Homoeopathy doctors or its organisation before
B passing the impugned order. Homoeopathy Doctors are treating
all patients who come for treatment. As is well known, most of
the Covid-19 patients, are asymptomatic and therefore such blanket
orders will cause grave prejudice to the Homoeopathy doctors,
who treat the patients. The direction to take action under the
Disaster Management Act is very harsh and the said order has
C been passed without hearing the doctors, who are affected by
such orders. The Writ Petition has been filed by a lawyer, who is
an ardent follower of homoeopathy medicine. The prayer was to
implement the direction passed by AYUSH on 06.03.2020. The
Hon’ble High Court unfortunately went beyond the pleadings and
D made observations which will affect the profession of
Homoeopathy doctors. It is pertinent to mention here that many
of the State Governments have been prescribing Homoeopathy
medicines as an immunity booster. Even the Health Minister,
Government of Kerala had given a press statement that
Homoeopathy medicines are very good for prevention of Covid-
E 19. In the State of Gujarat, the Government itself had prescribed
the homoeopathy medicines for its citizens.”
7. The appellant is aggrieved by the directions of the High Court
contained in paragraph 14 only. The High Court in its judgment dated
21.08.2020 itself has extracted the G.O. dated 21.04.2020 of the
F Government of Kerala where Government of Kerala was pleased to
approve the action plan outlining the Homeopathy Strategies for prevention
and management of COVID-19 in Kerala. It is now useful to refer to
the G.O. dated 21.04.2020, which has been quoted in the impugned
judgment, which is to the following effect:-
G “GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
Abstract
AYUSH Dept. – COVID-19 - Action Plan outlining the
Homeopathy Strategies for Prevention, and Management of
COVID-19 in Kerala – Approved - Orders issued.
H
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1081
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

------------------------------------------------------------------ A
AYUSH(B) DEPARTMENT
G.O.(Rt)No.161/2020/AYUSH Dated,
Thiruvananthapuram,
21/04/2020 B
------------------------------------------------------------------
Read:- 1. Letter No. DHTVM/2606/2019-P2 dtd. 13.04.2020 of
the Director of Homeopathy.
ORDER C
In the circumstances explained by the Director of Homeopathy
vide letter read above, Government are pleased to approve the
Action Plan outlining the Homeopathy Strategies for prevention
and management of COVID-19 in Kerala as appended to this
order. D

(By order of the Governor)
Bhooshan V.,”
8. We have heard Shri Venkita Subramoniam, learned counsel for E
the appellant and Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India
for the respondent.
9. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of Ministry of AYUSH to
which rejoinder has also been filed. The appellant being aggrieved only
with directions in paragraph 14 and no relief having been claimed by the F
appellant against the State of Kerala, we have not issued notice to
respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and we proceeded to decide this appeal after
hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Solicitor
General of India for the respondent.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the directions G
issued by the Division Bench of Kerala High Court in paragraph 14 to
take actions against Homeopathic doctors, who prescribe any drug as a
cure for COVID-19 disease should be proceeded with under the
provisions of Disaster Management Act, 2005 was uncalled for and
beyond the scope of the writ petition. Learned counsel submits that even
H
1082 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A the Government of India advisory dated 06.03.2020 permitted COVID-
19 like illness to be managed by AYUSH systems. The advisory itself
permits Homeopathy to be used as preventive, prophylactic, symptom
management of COVID-19 like illnesses and add on interventions to the
conventional care. The High Court has erred in confining right of
Homeopathic medical practitioners to prescribe only as immunity booster,
B
which direction is not in accord to the Guidelines dated 06.03.2020.
11. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that guidelines for
Homeopathic practitioners for COVID-19 has been issued by
Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH, which clearly permits medical
practitioners, which permission from local health authorities and Medical
C Superintendent of the hospital to prescribe medicines for COVID-19.
When the guidelines issued specifically permits treatment of COVID-
19 patients, the High Court erred in observing that Homeopathy
practitioners can only prescribe medicines as immunity booster. It is
submitted that the direction issued by the High Court in paragraph 14
D has made vulnerable the Homeopathic practitioners from being proceeded
with under Disaster Management Act, 2005 and actions by police and
other medical staff, which is demoralising the practitioners of
Homeopathy.
12. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India appearing
E for Ministry of AYUSH, Government of India has submitted that
Government of India keeping in view the unprecedented and unforeseen
precarious situation caused by COVID-19, the Ministry of AYUSH
decided to augment and strengthen the COVID -19 medical response of
the country by using the traditional healthcare system of the country,
which includes AYUSH Organisation, Homeopathic practices as well
F as Unani practices. Learned Solicitor General of India has referred to
advisory dated 06.03.2020, which covers the field and he has also referred
to the guidelines issued by Government of India. Shri Mehta has referred
to the affidavit filed on behalf of Ministry of AYUSH. He submits that
Homeopathy practitioners are permitted by the Ministry of AYUSH to
G prescribe medicines as (i) preventive and prophylactic; (ii) symptom
management of COVID-19; (iii) add on interventions to the conventional
care.
13. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties and have perused the records.
H
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1083
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

14. The advisory dated 06.03.2020 issued by the Ministry of A
AYUSH has been relied by the learned counsel for the appellant as well
as learned Solicitor General and was also extensively extracted by the
High Court in its judgment. The advisory dated 06.03.2020 contains the
object of AYUSH systems. It is useful to extract following (relevant of
Homeopathic only), which is part of advisory dated 06.03.2020:-
B
“i. Preventive and prophylactic:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Homoeopathy:
Arsenicum album 30, daily once in empty stomach for three days. C
The dose should be repeated after one month by following the
same schedule till Coronavirus infections prevalent in the
community.
In one of the studies Arsenic album as one of the constituents in a
formulation affected HT29 cells and human macrophages. Also, D
it showed SNF-KB hyperactivity (reduced expression of reporter
gene GFP in transfected HT29 cells), tTNF-a release in
macrophages. More over, Arsenic album is a common prescription
in the cases of respiratory infections in day to day practice.
ii. Symptom management of COVID-19 like illnesses
E
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Homoeopathy
Various medicines which found to be effective in treating flu like
illness are Arsenicum album, Btyonia alba, Rhus toxico dendron,
Belladonna Gelsemium Eupatorium perfoliatum. All these F
medicines should be taken in consultation with qualified physicians
of respective AYUSH systems.
iii. Add on Interventions to the conventional care
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx G
Homoeopathy
Medicine mentioned Symptom management of COVlD-19 like
illnesses under subhead Homoeopathy can also be given as add
on to conventional care.
H
1084 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A All these medicines should be taken in consultation with qualified
physicians of respective AYUSH systems.
15. The above clearly indicate that Ministry of AYUSH specifically
permits use of Homeopathy for following three ways:-
(i) Preventive and prophylactic;
B
(ii) Symptom management of COVID-19 like illness;
(iii) Add on interventions to the conventional care.
16. We may further notice the specific averments made by Ministry
of AYUSH in its affidavit dated 23.11.2020 regarding what is permitted
C to the Homeopathy Medical Practitioner as per Ministry of AYUSH.
Paragraph 16 of the affidavit sworn on behalf of the Ministry of AYUSH
is as follows:-
“16. In addition to the above, it is respectfully reiterated that
Ministry of AYUSH has clearly permitted the homeopathic medical
D practitioners to prescribe the chugs, as mentioned in the guidelines,
as an add-on drug to the conventional treatment for patients who
have been tested Covid positive and are undergoing conventional
treatment.
Thus in the respectful submission of the answering
E respondent, prescription of the medication prescribed by the
Ministry of AYUSH to Covid positive patients as an add-on
treatment is permitted, and therefore, any contention to the contrary
stating that homeopathic medical practitioner cannot prescribe any
treatment to Covid-19 positive patients, even as an add-on to
conventional treatment is liable to be rejected. It is stated that the
F
only embargo is that the said Medicines should not be administered
or advertised as a cure but should be administered as preventive
measure/immunity booster or as an add-on to the conventional
treatment.”
17. It is clear from the advisory dated 06.03.2020 and the specific
G stand taken by the Ministry of AYUSH as contained in paragraph 16
extracted above that Homeopathic medical practitioners are not only
confined to prescribe Homeopathic medicines only as immunity booster.
The following observations in paragraph 13 by the High Court does not
correctly comprehend the guidelines dated 06.03.2020:-
H
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1085
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

“13. ……………………………………When the Central as well A
as State Governments have approved prescription of certain
mixtures and tablets, as immunity boosters, qualified medical
practitioners in AYUSH can also prescribe the same, but only as
immunity boosters.”
18. The High Court in the impugned judgment has emphasised B
that if any qualified doctor practising AYUSH medicine, makes any
advertisement or prescribes any drugs or medicines, as a cure for
COVID-19 disease, except as prescribed in letter dated 6.3.2020, it is
open to the authorities to take appropriate action under the provisions of
the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Insofar as advertisement by
Homeopathic practitioners is concerned, i.e., clearly prohibited by the C
regulations framed in Section 33 read with Section 24 of Homeopathy
Central Council Act, 1973 namely the Homeopathic Practitioners
(Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics) Regulations, 1982.
The Regulation 6 prohibits advertisement for solicitation of patients
personally or advertisement in the newspaper by the Homeopathic D
practitioners. Regulation 6 is to the following effect:-
“6.(1) Advertising
Solicitation of patients directly or indirectly by a practitioner of
Homoeopathy either personally or by advertisement in the
newspapers, by placards or by the distribution of circular cards or E
handbills is unethical. A practitioner of Homoeopathy shall not
make use of, or permit others to make use of, him or his name as
a subject of any form or manner of advertising or publicity through
lay channels which shall be of such a character as to invite attention
to him or to his professional position or skill or as would ordinarily F
result in his self-aggrandisement provided that a practitioner of
Homoeopathy is permitted formal announcement in press about
the following matters, namely :-
(i) the starting of his practice;
(ii) change of the type of practice; G
(iii) change of address;
(iv) temporary absence from duty;.
(v) resumption of practice
(vi) succeeding to another’s practice. H
1086 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A (2) He shall further not advertise himself directly or indirectly
through price lists or publicity materials of manufacturing firms or
traders with whom he may be connected in any capacity, nor
shall he publish cases, operations or letters of thanks from patients
in non-professional newspapers or journals provided it shall be
permissible for him to publish his name in connection with a
B
prospectus or a director’s or a technical expert’s report.”
19. When statutory regulations itself prohibit advertisement, there
is no occasion for Homeopathic medical practitioners to advertise that
they are competent to cure COVID-19 disease. When the Scientists of
entire world are engaged in research to find out proper medicine/vaccine
C for COVID-19, there is no occasion for making any observation as
contained in paragraph 14 with regard to Homeopathic medical
practitioners. The homeopathy does not cure the disease, but it cures
the patients.
20. We have already noticed that the writ petition, which was
D filed in the Kerala High Court only with a limited relief for issuing direction
to respondent to implement the advisory dated 06.03.2020 issued by
Ministry of AYUSH, there was no occasion for High Court to make
observations and issue direction as it has been made in paragraph 14.
21. We, however, make it clear that what is permissible for
E Homeopathic medical practitioner in reference to COVID-19
symptomatic and asymptomatic patients is already regulated by the said
advisory and guidelines. The Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH
has also brought on record the guidelines issued subsequent to 06.03.2020
for Homeopathy medical practitioners for COVID-19, where
F Homeopathic approach to COVID-19 has been elaborately dealt with.
The said guidelines, which has been issued after 04.04.2020 has been
brought on the record as Annexure C by the Ministry of AYUSH. The
guidelines contained following under the heading “Homeopathic
approach”-

G “Homoeopathic Approach
It is advised that before taking up for homoeopathic medicines for
prophylaxis, Amelioration and mitigation, physician must acquaint
himself of above sections.
In case of epidemics or pandemics, first approach is to follow
H preventive measures and educate people about general measures
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1087
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

and to provide such interventions which will keep their immunity A
enhanced. Homeopathy therefore recommends issuing of public
notice for Genus epidemics identified by the designated experts
for immunity enhancement and practitioners may suggest the same
to the people and as per the Advisory issued by Ministry of
AYUSH (6).
B
Second approach is to provide homoeopathic symptomatic
mitigation to affected persons. Homoeopathic medicines are also
useful in the treatment of communicable diseases like Influenza
Like Illness (7) (8), dengue (9), acute encephalitis syndrome (10).
Several studies are also published which shows the immune
modulatory potential of homoeopathic medicines in preclinical C
studies (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16). These medicines can be
prescribed in an integrated manner or standalone depending on
the severity on a case to case
Therapeutic Aid
As a system with wholistic approach medicine were selected based D
on the presenting signs and symptoms of each patients (17)(18)
(19) (20). The medicines given here are suggestive based on their
use and studies in the past in diseases of similar presentation like
COVID-19 (21) (22) (23). Patients of COVID-19 are to be treated
with adjuvant Homoeopathic medicines with the permission from E
local health authorities and Medical Superintendent of the Hospital.
Homoeopathic doctors must follow all preventive measures (using
PPEs) as are required for dealing with COVID 19 patients.
The remedies according to different stages of disease are
given below:
F
Mild Disease (Symptomatic Amelioration and Mitigation
Approach):
Medicines like Aconite napellus, Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba,
Gelsemium sempervirens, Rhus tox. Eupatorium perfoliatum,
Ipecacaucunha, Belladonna, Camphora, may be used depending G
upon the symptoms similarities.
Severe disease but not in critical condition:
It is defined by following criteria (Dyspnoea, respiratory frequency
e” 30/min, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) d” 93%, PaO2/FiO2
ratio < 300, and/or lung infiltrates > 50% within 24 to 48 hours)/) H
1088 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R.

A • Suggested medicines are as adjuvant to Standard Management
guidelines in the hospital setting only with the approval of
authorities and willingness of the patient/guardian.
• The prescription is to be given only by institutionally qualified
practitioner.
B • Medicines like Phosphorus, Chelidonium, Veratrum Viride,
Iodum, Camphora, Cinchona officinalis, Lycopodium, Ars. iod.,
Antim ars., Stannum met, Carbo veg., can be prescribed on
symptomatic indication.
Posology
C
The medicine selected for each patient is tailored to person specific,
taking into consideration, his/her mental make-up, physical
symptoms, and characteristic particulars etc. In case of long term
illness, besides the above mentioned factors, age, occupation,
previous illnesses and life circumstance unique to that individual
D irrespective of the disease which he/she is suffering from, are
also taken into consideration; thus the dictum “Homoeopathy treats
the patient but not the disease”.
After the appropriate medicine is selected, it is essential to decide
the requisite potency, dose and repetition which is imperative for
E optimum response and faster recovery in each case. Different
types of potencies such as decimal or centesimal potencies can
be employed for treatment as are required for acute diseases.
However, selection of potency of the remedy is dependent on
various factors like susceptibility of the patient (high or low), type
F of disease (acute/chronic), seat/ nature and intensity of the disease,
stage and duration of the disease and also the previous treatment
of the disease (24).”
22. The above guidelines make it clear that Homeopathy has been
envisaged by the Ministry as the therapeutic aid.
G 23. The above guidelines refer to Homeopathy medicines as
medicines for prophylaxis, Amelioration and mitigation. The guidelines,
however, specifically provides that “the prescription has to be given only
by institutionally qualified practitioners”. The High Court in its impugned
judgment has not fully comprehended the guidelines dated 06.03.2020
and taking a restricted view of the guidelines and have made observations
H
DR. AKB SADBHAVANA MISSION SCHOOL OF HOMOEO PHARMACY v. 1089
THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AYUSH [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]

for taking appropriate actions against the Homeopathic medical A
practitioners, which cannot be approved. The High Court, however, is
right in its observation that no medical practitioner can claim that it can
cure COVID-19. There is no such claim in other therapy including
allopathy. The High Court is right in observing that no claim for cure can
be made in Homeopathy. The Homeopathy is contemplated to be used
B
in preventing and mitigating COVID-19 as is reflected by the advisory
and guidelines issued by the Ministry of AYUSH as noticed above.
24. We, thus, observe that directions issued by the High Court in
paragraph 14 of the judgment need to be modified to the extent as indicated
above. It goes without saying that Homeopathic medical practitioners
have to follow the advisory dated 06.03.2020 issued by AYUSH Ministry C
as well as guidelines for Homeopathic medical practitioners for COVID-
19 issued by Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH, as noted above.
The Civil Appeal is disposed of accordingly. The interlocutory applications
filed seeking permission for impleadment is rejected.
D

Devika Gujral Appeal disposed of.

E

F

G

H