Electro-Homeopathy Is Branch Of Homeopathic Medicine & Regulated By Medical Practitioners Act: Kerala High Court

The appeal before the High Court was filed by the Travancore-Cochin Medical Council.

The Division Bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. held, “On the facts of the instant case, we find that the qualification obtained by the 1st respondent/writ petitioner, even assuming it is a recognized one, is in a branch of Homeopathic medicine. If that be so, he would be regulated by the provisions of the Statutes mentioned above, should he pursue a practice as a practitioner of ElectroHomeopathic medicine. To hold otherwise would be disastrous for the people of this country, for, it is their lives that are at stake.”

“The upshot of the above discussion is that we allow this Writ Appeal, by dismissing the writ petition and declaring that the practice of Electro-Homeopathy is indeed regulated by the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 and the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act, 2021, as applicable”, it added.

Senior Advocate N. Raghuraj represented the Appellant while Senior Government Pleader T.P. Sajid represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The writ petition was filed by the a private respondent, who claimed to be a practitioner of alternative medicine Electro-Homeopathy, for which he was supposedly qualified by virtue of a diploma certificate obtained by him from the Council of Electro Homeopathic System of Medicine, Kanpur, U.P. It was alleged that the appellant had caused the State and its police machinery to interfere with his practice of Electro-Homeopathy without establishing any illegality on his part in the pursuit of such practice.

The Single Judge, who considered the matter, took note of the Division Bench of the Court wherein, in a similar factual situation, the Court had found that in the absence of any material brought to its notice to suggest that the practice of Electropathy/Electro-Homoeopathy was prohibited under law, the police could not interfere with the practice of Electropathy carried on by a citizen.

Reasoning

The Bench was of the view that the Division Bench judgment of the Court in W.P.(C).No.19484 of 2008, which was relied upon by the Single Judge, could not be seen as a precedent for the proposition that the practice of Electro-Homoeopathy is unregulated. As per the Bench, this judgment proceeded to decide the lis before it in the absence of any material produced by the parties that pointed to the existence of any law prohibiting the practice of Electro-Homoeopathy.

“Read with the fact that the judgment did not refer to the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 that were in vogue then, we are constrained to view the said judgment as per incuriam for not noticing the statutory provisions that held the field”, it held.

The Bench refused to accept as a general proposition that, in the country governed by a written Constitution, a citizen has an absolute liberty to do anything unless expressly prohibited by law. “As is well settled in our constitutional jurisprudence, the concept of absolute liberty is alien to our Constitution, and the protection of rights and liberties thereunder is only of such rights and liberties as remain when balanced against a citizen's corresponding duties and obligations towards fellow citizens”, the order read.

The Bench also clarified that while a citizen is guaranteed a fundamental right to practice any profession or to carry out any occupation, trade or business, that right is by no means absolute in nature and is subject to laws regulating professional qualification and conduct.

Allowing the writ appeal, the Bench held that the practice of Electro-Homoeopathy is regulated by the provisions of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 and the Kerala State Medical Practitioners Act, 2021.

Cause Title: The Travancore-Cochin Medical Council v. Rajesh K. (Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:42984)

Appearace

Appellant: Senior Advocate N.Raghuraj, Advocates Lal K. Joseph, P. Muraleedharan (Thuravoor), T.A.Luxy, Suresh Sukumar, Anzil Salim, Sanjay Sellen

Respondent: Senior Government Pleader T.P. Sajid, Advocate A.T. Anil Kumar

Click here to read/download Order