Background: The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare formed an Inter-Departmental Committee to evaluate the recognition of various alternative medicine systems, including Electro Homeopathy. HPL, a national lab responsible for setting standards and testing homeopathic medicines under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, was central to this assessment. In a meeting on February 19, 2021, the Committee concluded that Electro Homeopathy lacked sufficient scientific data to warrant a proper evaluation.
Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the Second Schedule of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act recognizes the German Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia, which includes Krauss and Zimpel prescriptions used in manufacturing Electro Homeopathic remedies. Due to the inability to produce tinctures, the petitioner urged the analysis of these prescriptions by HPL to enable the Committee to assess Electro Homeopathy as an alternative medicine system.
Court's Ruling: Justice Subramonium Prasad, presiding over the case, emphasized that recognizing a new or alternative system of medicine is a policy matter and not within the judiciary's purview. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Academy of Nutrition Improvement & Ors. v. Union of India, where it was stated that courts generally refrain from interfering with government policy decisions on public health, especially those based on thorough research and expert input.
Analysis of HPL's Role: The Court highlighted that HPL's obligations are limited to the functions mentioned under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Rules, which do not cover clinical studies. Consequently, HPL is not obliged to analyze Electro Homeopathic medicines. The Court supported the stance of the Ministry of Ayush that since Electro Homeopathy is not covered under Rule 2(dd) and the Second Schedule of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the analysis of these medicines does not fall within HPL's purview.
Policy Implications: Justice Prasad reiterated that courts do not form or interfere with policies and that such matters should be addressed by relevant government bodies. He advised the petitioner to collaborate with other organizations advocating for the recognition of Electro Homeopathy as an alternative form of medicine.
Conclusion: The Delhi High Court's decision underscores the judiciary's role in respecting and deferring to government policy decisions, especially in public health matters. The Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the recognition of alternative medicine systems must be based on substantial scientific evidence and thorough evaluation by qualified authorities. This case highlights the challenges faced by proponents of alternative medicine in gaining official recognition and the rigorous standards required for such recognition.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.