TN Siddha Medical Council Members Permitted To Practice Modern Medicine But Not To Store Allopathy Medicine Without License: Madras HC

Justice G Jayachandran observed that while there was no bar on Siddha practitioners to practice modern medicine, the case against the doctor was that she had stocked drugs without a license which was in contravention of the Act.

“Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 mandates storing for sale or for distribution, or sell or stock or exhibit or offer for sale or distribute any drug should be only with license issued for the said purpose. Section 27(b)(ii) provides penalty for contravening Section 18(c). The case against the petitioner is not for using modern scientific system, but for stocking and selling the drugs without license,” the court observed.

The court noted that as per GO Ms.No.248, issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department on September 8, 2010, the registered members of the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council were permitted to practice modern scientific system of medicine. However, the court noted that as per Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, any drug could be stored for distribution, sale, exhibition etc only with license issued for the said purpose.

"G.O.Ms.No.248, dated 08.09.2010 issued by Health and Family Welfare Department, which permits registered members of the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council to practice Modern Scientific System of Medicine for the purpose of Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Therefore, adopting modern Scientific System of medicine by the petitioner is not prohibited. However, the prosecution is for storing Allopathy Drugs in her clinic," the court said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by S Sindhu, a bachelor of Siddha Medicine and Surgery (BSMS) and was duly registered with the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council. While she was running a clinic, on February 28, 2017, an official from the office of the Assistant Director of Drugs Control inspected her clinic and recovered allopathy medicines from the clinic alleging that they were in contravention of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940. A private complaint was filed by the Drugs Inspector under Section 200 CrPC for offence punishable under Section 27 (b) (ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

Sindhu argued that the trial court had failed to apply its mind before taking cognizance of the complaint. She pointed out that the court had assumed that she was a quack doctor and did not consider the Government Order that permitted Siddha practitioners in the state to practice modern medicine.

It was further submitted that being a Siddha medical practitioner, she was entitled to possess a small quantity of allopathy medicine in her clinic and the same would not amount to selling medicine. She also submitted that there was no criminal intention for possessing drugs and thus there was no violation of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act or the Drugs Rules 1945. She also pointed out that her reply to the show cause notice was not properly considered by the authorities.

The Government Advocate however submitted that the reply of the petitioner to the show cause notice was not satisfactory. It was also submitted that though the provisions under the Act with respect to the manufacture, sale, and distribution of drugs and cosmetics was not applicable to Ayurvedic, Siddha and Unani drugs, it would apply to allopathy drugs. He thus submitted that the show cause notice was issued for possessing medicines without a drug license.

Noting that the case registered for stocking and selling drugs without license, the court refused to quash the proceedings. However, since the case was registered in 2018, the court directed the Magistrate to dispose the case as expeditiously as possible.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. A. Velmurugan

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. K. M. D. Muhilan Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389

Case Title: Tmt.S.Sindhu v Tamil Nadu State represented by Drugs Inspector,

Case No: Crl.O. P.No.20143 of 2024