SC informed of closure report in FIR against Baba Ramdev over allopathic medicine

The complaints were originally filed by the Patna and Raipur chapters of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), alleging that Ramdev’s comments undermined COVID-19 treatment efforts and discouraged people from seeking necessary medical care.

By  Storyboard18Sep 12, 2025 10:34 AM
SC informed of closure report in FIR against Baba Ramdev over allopathic medicine
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing before a Bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma, conveyed the development and noted that the complaints against the yoga guru appeared to be sponsored by vested interest groups.

The Supreme Court was informed on September 9 that the Chhattisgarh Police had filed a closure report in an FIR registered against Baba Ramdev over his controversial remarks on allopathic medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a media report.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing before a Bench comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma, conveyed the development and noted that the complaints against the yoga guru appeared to be sponsored by vested interest groups.

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, representing Ramdev, submitted that while Chhattisgarh had complied with earlier court directions and filed its response, Bihar had yet to do so. The Bench observed that Ramdev's plea for clubbing multiple FIRs may now be redundant.

Dave, however, expressed concern that proceedings could be revived if a protest petition is filed by the complainant. He urged the court to ascertain the status of the Bihar case before final disposal. The matter has been adjourned to the last week of December.

The complaints were originally filed by the Patna and Raipur chapters of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), alleging that Ramdev’s comments undermined COVID-19 treatment efforts and discouraged people from seeking necessary medical care.

As a result, Ramdev was booked under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Disaster Management Act, 2005, including IPC Sections 188 (disobedience to a public servant's order), 269 (negligent act likely to spread infection), and 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace), the report added.

First Published on Sep 12, 2025 10:34 AM

More from Storyboard18