Delhi High Court says Ramdev’s statements on allopathy fall within parameters of freedom of speech

Calling Ramdev’s statements “public opinion” and observing that “shackles” cannot put on such views, the court said that any case seeking blocking of statements has to be tested on the anvil of Article 19 (1) (a).

“There is a right to air an opinion or to voice an opinion. Sometimes the opinion is, maybe, voiced in a terminology which may appear to be very offensive. Some people may be more vitriolic than others in the manner in which they express what they want to say. Someone may be more temperate. Someone may be more intemperate,” it added.

The court also said that there are protocols and institutions in place to check false medical claims or magic remedies and it cannot say whether Coronil, a product of Ramdev’s Patanjali, is a cure for Covid-19 or not. It said the same is to be decided by medical experts.

“The fact that people have taken allopathic medicine, it has worked in many people, maybe a majority of people, but there are people in whom it has not worked. Someone is there who has a view that it is because of the absolute inefficacy of the allopathic system of treatment that so many people have died. He airs that view on a public platform. I think that comes within the parameters of Article 19 1(a),” it said.

The counsel representing the DMA earlier argued before the court that Ramdev’s statements were affecting the doctors and he was calling the science fake in the midst of pandemic, which “ultimately will affect the health of the nation”. DMA has also sought to restrain Ramdev from “disseminating false information” about Coronil.

Ramdev’s counsel, senior advocate Rajiv Nayar objected to maintainability of the suit. The court orally told him to tell Ramdev to not make any provocative statements.