Attempt To Distract The Court, Proxy Litigation: Supreme Court Imposes ₹ 10k Cost On Intervenor In Patanjali Case Who Cited Illegal Advertisements By Quack Allopathy Doctor

The Supreme Court has imposed Rs.10,000 cost on an intervention applicant who sought permission to be impleaded as a co-petitioner with the Indian Medical Association (IMA) in its Writ Petition against Patanjali Ayurved for publishing alleged misleading advertisements.

The applicant cited illegal advertisement by a person claiming to be an Allopathy Doctor, on whose treatment the applicant's mother passed away in the year 2019. While dismissing the application, the Court termed the application a proxy litigation and an attempt to distract the Court. During the hearing the applicant told the Court that he has called the person a doctor in his application since that persons was claiming to be a doctor and that according to him, the person is just a quack doctor.

The Bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah dealt with Intervention Application before it proceeded to hear the main case against Patanjali and ultimately rejected the apology on affidavit by Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna. It was during the course of that hearing that the Court told the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority, "we will rip you apart", for their alleged inaction against Patanjali.

At the outset, Justice Kohli said, "Application moved seeking impleadment? Who is that gentleman? What is this Intervention Application (IA) for? In what capacity have you moved this Application?"

Counsel on behalf of the intervenor responded, "Yes, this Application has been moved to implead as a Petitioner."

"Why? What ground? As a Petitioner? Co-Petitioner with Indian Medical Association (IMA), what is the relief? Come to your Affidavit. Who are you?" asked Justice Kohli.

The Counsel responded, "I am an individual, my mother received treatment from.."

Justice Amanullah intervened to say, "From an Allopathic Doctor."

The Counsel submitted, "Not from Allopathic, a complete quack with no qualification."

Justice Kohli inquired, "What will you do with your matter here? Why don't you go and file your running matter somewhere else? Why do you file this Petition here and use this petition as a crutch?"

"How can you become a Petitioner to this?" asked Justice Amanullah.

The Counsel contended, "Ladyship, on the advertisements only."

Justice Kohli asked, "What on the advertisements?"

"There are 20 pages of advertisements, full-page I have annexed, statement of every treatment of cardiovascular...," the Counsel submitted.

Justice Amanullah said, "We are now focused on the larger issue, not individuals".

"Please file before the competent Court. Don't jump into matters because you think you will get good publicity," Justice Kohli said.

Justice Amanullah remarked, "No, no, we will observe that it appears to be a proxy litigation, because you have said that he is an allopathic doctor, he is making such and such a demand."

"No, no, he is not an allopathic doctor, he is a PhD Doctor," the Counsel submitted.

Justice Amanullah said, "Whatever, but you in your...Modern Medicine.. you compare it with...."

While refusing to entertain the Application, the Court said that it was "absolutely meritless" and should be dismissed with "cost". To this, the Counsel sought permission to withdraw it. "Allow me to withdraw this because this is very serious," he submitted.

"When was your mother admitted?" Justice Kohli asked.

The Counsel answered, "That was long ago; I have registered Criminal Complaint, an FIR."

"So serious that you sat over it for so long, what is the date of the demise of your mother? 2019? It was so serious that for the past five years, you sat. We are asking you, what Litigation did you initiate in the Court of law?" Justice Kohli said.

The Counsel submitted that he has been fighting at every forum. "Ladyship, Section 156(3) of CrPC...I am here to assist the Court."

Justice Kohli said, "We don't need your assistance. We will take care of it ourselves. Least of all from a person who sits and becomes a fencesitter and jumps into frame thinking he will get publicity. Sorry."

"No, no, no publicity, Ladyship," contended the Counsel.

The Court ordered, "We have heard the petitioner praying inter alia for impleadment in the present matter as a petitioner and for impleadment of an institution and a private Doctor on a plea that his mother was given improper treatment due to which she expired in the year 2019. We see no reason to entertain the present Application, which in our opinion is frivolous and an attempt to distract the Court. The Application is dismissed with cost of Rs. 10,000 to be deposited with the Advocate welfare fund. Cost to be deposited within one week from today."

During the dectation of the order, the petitioner's counsel intervened to say that the person he has sought to implead as a respondent is not a Doctor. Justice Kholi then remarked that the petitioner himself has described the person as a Doctor.

The Counsel again requested the Court to allow it to withdraw the Application.

"Why should we permit you to withdraw it? You should have used your good sense before filing such an Application," Justice Kohli remarked. Consequently, the Court dismissed the Application of the Intervenor with a cost of Rs. 10,000.

The Counsel then submitted that the order should not preclude the petitioner from availing any other legal remedy. "We have not talked about anything else. We are saying it is meritless here. Do what you have to", Justice Kohli said.

Cause Title: Indian Medical Association v. Union Of India [W.P.(C) No. 645/2022]

The story has been updated after the order was published.

Click here to read/download Order