LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Magical Remedies

G. ARAVINTHAN ,
  25 August 2011       Share Bookmark

Court :
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Brief :
The Drugs And Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954
Citation :
Charanjit Singh vs Press Council Of India And Others

The issues raised in this petition touching upon the alleged violations of the The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 have already been dealt with by us in Smt. Aarti d/o late Shri Raj Kumar Versus State of Punjab through Principal Secretary and others, Civil Writ Petition No. 5898 of 2007 disposed off by our order dated 20.03.2009. After a detailed discussion of the scheme and the provisions of the Act (supra), this Court had issued the following directions in the said case:- "In the result, we dispose of this writ petition with the observation that the police authorities in the States of Punjab,Haryana and UT of Chandigarh shall take suitable action wherever any CWP No. 8807 of 2009 [2] violation of Section 3 or Section 5 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 comes to their notice. We further direct that a copy of this order be forwarded to the Chairman of Law Commission of India for his kind perusal and examination whether there is any scope for reviewing and/or suitably modifying the scheme of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 so as to bring advertisements that are assuring magic remedies for problems other than medical, are also brought within the purview of the said legislation. No costs." In the light of the above directions which continue to be effective, there is no need for issuing any further directions in the present writ petition, which is hereby disposed off in terms of the above. No costs.

 
"Loved reading this piece by G. ARAVINTHAN?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Constitutional Law
Views : 3273




Comments