Homeopathy, Ayurveda Practitioners Registered With TN Board Can Also Practice Allopathy Based On Course Training: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a doctor registered with State Homoeopathy Medical Council who was found practicing in Allopathy Medicine.

It observed that Homeopathy, Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani practitioners who are registered in the Tamil Nadu Board of Indian Medicine are eligible to practice in the respective system with Allopathy based on the training and teaching they had in the Course. The court however cautioned that such persons cannot exclusively practice Allopathy medicine.

Justice Teeka Raman was hearing a plea wherein a Doctor had sought for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against him for the offenses of cheating and for violating the provisions of the Indian Medical Council Act 1956. 

The petitioner contended that he had completed the Bachelor of Homoeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS) and had registered himself in the Tamil Nadu Homoeopathy Medical Council. Thus, the petitioner was a registered medical practitioner in the Indian system of medicine. The petitioner also cited a circular issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu dated 15.10.2010 wherein it was held that "the institutionally qualified Practitioners of Ayurveda, Sidddha and Unani, who are registered in the Tamil Nadu Board of Indian Medicine, Chennai are eligible to practice in the respective system with Allopathy based on the training and teaching they had in the Course. But they cannot exclusively do the practice in Allopathy Medicine."

The petitioners also brought to the notice of the court another circular wherein the Government had held that as per section 17(3) B of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 the institutionally qualified practitioners of Siddha, Ayurveda and Unani Tibb Homeopathy are eligible to practice respective systems with modern scientific medicine including Surgery and Gynecology Obstetrics, Anesthesiology, ENT, Opthalmology, etc based on the training and teaching. 

In the above circular, the Government had also directed the Commissioners of Police/Inspectors General of Police, Deputy Inspector General of Police, and Superintendents of Police to instruct the police officers in all cities and districts not to intervene with the practice of registered practitioners of Siddha, Ayurveda, Unani, Homeopathy, and Naturopathy who are registered in the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council, Tamil Nadu Board of Indian Medicine and Tamil Nadu Homeopathy Medical Council.

The court took note of the above circular. The court also noted the decision of the Madras High court in Sangaiyya v. The State of Tamil Nadu wherein the court had held as under:

Therefore, under sub-clause (iii) of clause (ee) of Rule 2 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, the Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby declares every registered medical practitioner holding the qualification specified in the second, third or fourth Schedule to the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (Central Act 48 of 1970) and Part III of the Schedule to the Tamil Nadu Siddha System of Medicine (Development and Registration of Practitioners) Act, 1997 (Tamil Nadu Act 34 of 1997) and registered in the Medical Register of the State maintained under the aforesaid Acts, as a person practicing the modern scientific system of medicine for the purposes of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (Central Act 23 of 1940).

Seeing that the issue at hand was already covered by the above judgments and in light of the government circulars, the court deemed it fit to quash the charge sheet against the petitioner and thus allowed the plea of the doctor.

Case Title: Dr.R.Senthilkumar v. The State and others

Case No: Crl. O.P. No.23128 of 2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 325

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.V.Prakash Babu

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.S.Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) (R1)