Kerala High Court grants relief to TheLiverDoc in defamation case over social media post on herbal medicines

The Court intervened after a Magistrate issued summons to the doctor on a complaint by an Ayurveda company alleging that the doctor's post on 'X' linked its product to liver failure and damaged its reputation.
Liverdoc and kerala high court
Liverdoc and kerala high court
Published on
3 min read
Listen to this article

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted interim relief to Dr. Cyriac Abby Philips, popularly known as TheLiverDoc, in a defamation case filed by an Ayurveda company over his social media post warning about the risks of certain herbal medicines including products made by the company [Dr Cyriac Abby Philips v State of Kerala & anr].

Justice Jobin Sebastian said that the doctor does not have to appear before the Magistrate until the next hearing of the case in High Court.

It directed that the matter be heard next on May 22.

"Admit. The learned Public Prosecutor takes notice for the 1st respondent. Issue notice to the 2nd respondent. Heard the learned Senior counsel who appeared for the petitioner. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and the averments contained in the petition, the appearance of the accused pursuant to the summons issued by the Jurisdictional Court shall stand deferred till the next posting of this Crl.MC. Post on 22.05.2026," the Court directed.

Justice Jobin Sebastian
Justice Jobin Sebastian

The petitioner, Dr. Philips is a Kerala based hepatologist and clinician-scientist known for his work on liver diseases and his active presence on social media under the handle 'The Liver Doc'.

He frequently engages in public health discussions and is widely followed for sharing evidence based medical opinions and for his critical commentary on unverified claims relating to alternative medicine systems and supplements.

The present case before the High Court arose from a private complaint filed by SNA Oushadhasala Pvt Ltd before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court at Thrissur, alleging defamation (Section 499 IPC).

The complaint claimed that a social media post made by the doctor damaged its repetition.

According to the complaint, Dr. Phillips had posted on platform 'X' (formerly Twitter) in March 2024, that a patient who consumed a traditional Ayurvedic medicine developed acute liver failure and was on ventilator support.

The post also contained termed Ayurveda a 'pseudoscience' and contained images of certain products manufactured by the company along with their labels.

The company claimed that the post along with the images created an impression that its products caused the liver damage in the patient and added that this affected their goodwill and credibility among the public.

Taking cognizance of the offence under Section 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the Magistrate issued summons to Dr. Philips. It said that the doctor's claim for protection under the statutory exceptions to defamation under Section 499 of the IPC could only be examined during trial.

The doctor then approached the High Court seeking to quash the complaint and all further proceedings.

In his plea, the doctor stated that the proceedings initiated against him was aimed at silencing scientific opinion and discouraging public health discourse.

He stated that the social media post was based on the clinical treatment of a patient diagnosed with Herb Induced Liver Injury (HILI), supported by medical records, diagnostic tests and biopsy findings.

He emphasised that the post was made in good faith as part of his professional duty to raise awareness about potential risks associated with unregulated herbal drug consumption.

The doctor further contended that his post did not specifically target the company and was limited to criticism of a product which by itself would not amount to defamation.

The petition also invoked the statutory exceptions under Section 499 IPC, particularly those protecting statements made in good faith for public good and communication and claimed that the magistrate should have considered these protections at the initial stage to prevent abuse of process.

The Court granted interim relief after considering the arguments.

The petitioner was represented by Senior Counsel P Vijaya Bhanu along with advocates Thomas J Anakkallunkal, Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth, Sreelakshmi Sabu, Dhanya Sunny, Archana NJ, Ann Jomiya Antony and Anjali CS.

[Read Order]

Attachment
PDF
Dr Cyriac Abby Philips v State of Kerala & anr
Preview
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com