AKHTAR HUSSAIN DELVI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an allopathic medical practitioner practising medicine at Bangalore. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for a declaration declaring that it is legally permissible for allopathic medical practitioners to prescribe drugs and medicines of ayurvedic origin which have been subjected to clinical and/or other tests and have consequently been accepted by the profession of allopathic medical practice and also for a direction not to take any penal action against him for prescribing any drug or medicine to his patients.

(2.) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is, once the petitioner has been registered as a medical practitioner he is entitled to prescribe any medical including medicine of ayurvedic origin since there is no prohibition either under the Indian medicine central Council Act, 1970 ( for short ?the Central Act') or under the karnataka Ayurvedic, Naturopathy, Siddha, Unani and Yoga practitioners' Registration and Medical Practitioner's Miscellaneous provisions Act, 1961 (for short `the State Act') and therefore, in the event if he prescribes any medicine of ayurvedic origin, the petitioner shall not be prosecuted. He further submits that the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. MUKHTIAR CHAND AND OTHERS vs STATE of PUNJAB AND OTHERS has disagreed with the view taken by the Supreme Court in the case of A. K. SABHAPATHY (DR.) vs state OF KERALA and has taken the view that in the absence of any law prohibiting the practice either by the State or Centre it is open for a doctor to prescribe any medicine. At para 46 of the above said judgment, the Supreme Court has held as follows:-

(3.) FROM this it is seen that if the State Government by legislation recognises any qualification as sufficient qualification for registration in the State medical register of that State, it is open for such persons to practice in that field in that State.