A suit by Delhi Medical Associations (DMA) seeking to restrain him from dissemination false statements and information in respect of Patanjali Ayurved’s coronil.
His false statements against medical science and Doctors and indirectly affecting public interest through his statement.
DMA sought interim relief and the court refused by stating that it would first hear the suit on the issue of maintainability.
Sr. Adv. Rajv Nayar on behalf of Ramdev and Sr. Adv. Dutta appearing for DMA.
The question arises whether nature of the suit falling under section 91 of CPC?
S-91 says that Public nuisances and other wrongful acts affecting the public.
The court enquiried Sr. Adv. Dutta whether this was S-91 suit? We are in the regime of CPC, this is not Art226. Firstly, you establish your locus.
Dutta argued that Ramdev is making public statements that medical science is fake. Whether it is protected under article 19(1)(a)?
Justice Shankar remarked,
First of all there is something called Art19(1)(a). It’s an opinion which has been expressed.
PIL Or SUIT?
The court said, This is a PIL masquerading as a suit! The court asked, assuming coronil is not a cure and public interest is harmed, for that there is a provision in CPC under S-92. This is not a PIL and you haven’t filed a PIL.
The court said under provisions of CPC we have restraints, we can’t pass expansive orders like in PILs.