Is it not individual discretion to buy a drug? Delhi High Court seeks Baba Ramdev reply to plea against his remarks on allopathy, COVID-19 cure

The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice to Baba Ramdev and others in a suit filed against the Yoga guru for allegedly spreading misinformation through his statements against allopathy and for touting Patanjali drug Coronil as a cure for COVID-19 (Resident Doctors Association, AIIMS v. Ram Kishan Yadav alias Swami Ramdev & Ors)..Justice C Hari Shankar briefly heard Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal for the plaintiffs, after which he ordered,“Issue notice. Accepted on behalf of 1 (Baba Ramdev)…replies be filed by defendants positively within a week from today…".Sibal had stated that Ramdev made false claims that Coronil is a medicine for COVID-19.“It poses a danger to public health, and in that context, the suit has been filed,” he said.Sibal alleged that Ramdev had a “habit of doing it” and added,“He had earlier done it. He had said he could cure AIDS.".Referring to Section 91 (public nuisances and other wrongful acts affecting the public) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), Justice Hari Shankar asked Sibal,“You have to convince me if it comes within the ambit of the expressions "public nuisance" or "other wrongful act affecting or likely to affect public health".”Section 91(1) CPC mandates that in the “case of a public nuisance or other wrongful act affecting, or likely to affect, the public, a suit for a declaration and injunction or for such other relief as may be appropriate in the circumstances of the case, may be instituted either by the Advocate General, or with the leave of the Court, by two or more persons, even though no special damage has been caused to such persons by reason of such public nuisance or other wrongful act.”.The Court questioned further,“Suppose I make a statement. I have a medicine with me which according to me cures Corona or any kind of disease. (I say) rather than going to allopathy my medicine is more than enough and I am public figure. There is a possibility that some members may take my medicine. Many may not follow that treatment. At what stage can you say it is like to affect the public?”Justice Hari Shankar went on to ask,“I may say, but it is in the individual discretion to buy or not… Can you say my statement is likely to affect the public? This seems like something that requires some debate.”Sibal said he was relying on a judgment of the Madras High Court that had dealt with the question and discussed “what is the meaning of wrongful act” and “scope of public nuisance”..Appearing for Ramdev, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar opposed the grant of leave. Sibal, however, stated that at the present stage, the matter was between the plaintiff and the Court.The Court, thereafter, posted the matter on August 10 while calling for replies from the defendants..The suit has claimed, “The misinformation campaign as to the alleged ill-effects and lack of efficacy of allopathy during the ongoing pandemic have the propensity to divert people from allopathic treatments prescribed as the standard form of care even by the Government of India, and thereby directly violates the right to health of persons in India/citizens of India, which is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution.”.Earlier, the Delhi Medical Association had approached the Court to restrain Baba Ramdev from disseminating false statement and false information in respect of Patanjali's Coronil..Is Baba Ramdev to be blamed for people buying Coronil? Delhi High Court issues summons in suit to restrain false statements on Patanjali drug