New Delhi: On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court declined to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition that sought directions for a scientific investigation into Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu‘s claims about his wife’s alleged recovery from stage 4 cancer through a diet regimen and Ayurveda.
The plea moved by Divya Rana, a practising lawyer stated that the claims made by Navjot Singh Sidhu regarding his wife’s recovery from cancer have not been validated by any scientific authority, raising significant concerns. The widespread spread of such unverified assertions could lead to misguided reliance on unproven treatments, posing a potential risk to public health.
The plea further stated that in response to Navjot Singh Sidhu’s claims, numerous oncologists and medical experts have rejected his statements, citing a lack of scientific evidence. Leading oncologists have emphasized that cancer treatment requires complex medical interventions such as chemotherapy, radiation, and targeted therapies, which cannot be substituted by diet alone. Experts have also criticized his assertions about fasting and the exclusion of sugar and carbohydrates, describing them as oversimplified and unsupported by credible research.
A bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that Navjot Singh Sidhu was merely expressing his personal opinion, and his right to freedom of speech could not be restricted. “He is not instructing anyone to follow it; he is simply sharing what worked for him,” Justice Gedela remarked. He further suggested to the petitioner, “Instead of filing a PIL against Sidhu’s statements, perhaps you should focus on challenging the production of cigarettes and alcohol, which everyone would agree are undoubtedly harmful.”
After Court observation, the petitioner chose to withdraw the petition.
The plea stated that the media outlets have highlighted differing opinions on the issue, with some emphasizing the potential need for further scientific exploration of dietary approaches to cancer treatment, while others, including oncologists, have outright rejected the claims as unscientific and misleading.
The controversy surrounding the news has gained momentum due to its rapid dissemination across traditional and digital media platforms. Leading news channels are repeatedly broadcasting the story, further amplifying its reach and influence among the general public, it stated.
The quick spread of this information, combined with the absence of scientific validation, has raised serious concerns about public health implications. Many individuals may act upon the claims without understanding their lack of clinical backing, potentially leading to adverse consequences, plea read. (ANI)
