New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (December 4) refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu over his claims that her wife was able to recover from stage-IV cancer following a strict diet plan and Ayurveda, saying he had just voiced his opinion and it is his freedom of speech.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while refusing to entertain the PIL, said that the Congress leader had just voiced his opinion and it is his freedom of speech.
Counter free speech by free speech and not by curtailing his free speech: High Court
“He is just voicing his opinion. Counter his claims by holding a press conference. Counter free speech by free speech and not by curtailing his free speech under the fear of legal action or contempt. We still have freedom of speech in this country. You can’t say freedom of speech be curtailed. You counter his claim. This is not our domain. If you don’t agree with this gentleman’s views, don’t listen to him,” the bench said.
There are books that are bad, don’t read them: High Court
The bench further said, “There are books that are bad, don’t read them. Who is asking you to read them? Free speech is not meant to be curtailed by bringing them to court and putting them under the fear of contempt withdrawn. We can’t entertain a writ petition on this. Thousands of people claim they have a cure for something but that does not mean you will seek action against them.”
What did Sidhu say?
Sidhu, in a press conference held on November 21, said that his wife Navjot Kaur Sidhu had been clinically declared cancer-free and speaking on the occasion he had said that change in dietary and lifestyle helped his wife in recovery. He had further said that the diet that made her wife recover from the stage-IV cancer included things like lemon water, raw turmeric, apple cider vinegar, neem leaves, pomegranate, amla, beetroot, basil, pumpkin and walnuts.
Sidhu’s claims were questioned by the oncologists and the Congress leader later clarified that the diet plan of her wife was implemented in consultation with doctors and the diet chart should be considered “facilitation in the treatment”.
