The Kerala High Court has held that the practice of Electro-Homeopathy is regulated by statutory medical laws in the State and that practitioners cannot claim immunity from regulatory requirements merely by describing it as an alternative therapy. A Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. allowed an appeal filed by the Travancore-Cochin Medical Council and dismissed a writ petition filed by an Electro-Homeopathy practitioner.
The dispute arose from a writ petition filed by petitioner who claimed to be qualified in Electro-Homeopathy on the basis of a diploma issued by the Council of Electro Homeopathic System of Medicine, Kanpur. He had alleged that the Travancore-Cochin Medical Council had improperly caused the State and police authorities to interfere with his practice despite there being no law prohibiting Electro-Homeopathy. A Single Judge had earlier granted relief after relying on an earlier Division Bench decision which had observed that, in the absence of any legal prohibition, police authorities could not interfere with the practice of Electro-Homeopathy.
Before the Division Bench, the Medical Council argued that the Single Judge’s assumption that Electro-Homeopathy was unregulated was legally incorrect. The Council pointed to the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 and the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act, 2021, contending that persons engaged in the practice of Homeopathic medicine are required to comply with the regulatory framework prescribed under those enactments, including registration requirements.
Rejecting the practitioner’s contention that Electro-Homeopathy was merely a therapy akin to naturopathy or aromatherapy, the Court held that the earlier Division Bench decision could not be treated as a precedent for the proposition that Electro-Homeopathy is unregulated. The Bench noted that the earlier judgment had been rendered without considering the statutory provisions governing medical practice in the State and therefore had to be regarded as per incuriam.
The Court also disagreed with the broader proposition that a citizen is free to do anything unless expressly prohibited by law. It observed that the concept of absolute liberty is alien to India’s constitutional framework and that individual rights must be balanced against corresponding duties and obligations towards society.
Significantly, the Bench held that even assuming the practitioner’s qualification was valid, it was a qualification in a branch of Homeopathic medicine. Consequently, any person practising Electro-Homeopathy would be subject to the regulatory provisions governing Homeopathic practitioners. The Court cautioned that holding otherwise would have serious consequences for public health, observing that medical regulation exists to balance a professional’s right to practise with the public’s right to life and proper healthcare.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Single Judge’s judgment, dismissed the writ petition, and declared that the practice of Electro-Homeopathy is regulated by the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 and the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act, 2021.
