Coronil: Plea in Delhi court for FIR against Ramdev
Chief metropolitan magistrate Sumeet Anand issued a notice to the city police on the basis of the plea by an advocate Tushar Anand who had has contended that on June 23, Baba Ramdev launched the coronil kit, claiming that it would cure a Covid-19 patient within seven days.Updated: Jul 05, 2020 06:27 IST
A Delhi court on Saturday asked the city police to file an Action Taken Report (ATR) after a city lawyer moved a plea seeking the registration of an FIR against yoga guru Baba Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna, Patanjali and the trustees of Divya Yog Mandir Trust for falsely claiming that they had found a cure for Covid-19 and launching the “coronil kit”.
Chief metropolitan magistrate Sumeet Anand issued a notice to the city police on the basis of the plea by an advocate Tushar Anand who had has contended that on June 23, Baba Ramdev launched the coronil kit, claiming that it would cure a Covid-19 patient within seven days.
The plea, filed through advocates Lalit Valecha and Manu Prabhakar, stated that the company promoted by the yoga guru falsely claimed that it had found a sure-shot cure for the Covid -19 virus.
The complaint stated that Patanjali only had the requisite permission to make an immunity booster and their claim of AYUSH Ministry permitting them to make the cure is false.
Appearing for the petitioner, his counsels told the court that he had first filed a complaint at the Vasant Vihar police station on June 24 seeking the registration of FIRs against Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna, their company, and all the trustees of the Divya Yog Mandir Trust. However, no action was taken, they said.
Advocate Valecha said that the police could not avoid their duty of registering the FIR if a cognizable offence is disclosed in the complaint.
“The registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Indian Penal Code, if the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation,” he said.
Following this, the court sought the opposing counsel’s response and posted the matter for July 15.
Patanjali spokesperson did not respond to HT’s calls, text messages or email.