|
In a major regulatory clarification issued against the backdrop of escalating medical strikes and debate over ‘cross-practice’ in Maharashtra, the National Commission for Homoeopathy (NCH) has released a public notice detailing the precise legal boundaries governing homoeopathic practitioners.
The notice, issued by NCH secretary Dr. Mangesh R. Jatkar, aims to clear widespread misinterpretations surrounding the extent to which homoeopathic doctors are permitted to practice alternative systems of medicine or participate in government-run healthcare initiatives.
The regulatory clarification comes in direct response to intense turmoil across Maharashtra following an August 3 executive order instructing the Maharashtra Medical Council (MMC) to register Bachelor of Homoeopathic Medicine and Surgery (BHMS) doctors who completed the Certificate Course in Modern Pharmacology (CCMP). The state government's decision ignited immediate pushback from modern medicine bodies, including the Indian Medical Association (IMA) and resident doctors' associations, who initiated statewide agitations and suspended non-emergency services to protest against what they termed institutionalized ‘mixopathy’.
Addressing the statutory provisions, the NCH highlighted Regulation 36 (y) of the NCH (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics for Practitioners of Homoeopathy) Regulations, 2022. The Commission reiterated that practicing any system of medicine other than homoeopathy is explicitly categorized as professional or ethical misconduct for registered homoeopaths. However, the NCH emphasized that the regulation contains a specific proviso intended to enable targeted public health interventions without violating ethical standards.
According to the proviso embedded within Regulation 36 (y), the prohibition against cross-practice does not prevent or restrict a homoeopathic medical practitioner from functioning under a National Health Programme or state-run health initiative. To be eligible under this exception, the practitioner must have completed a formal training programme or course explicitly recognized or prescribed by the competent governmental authority. The apex regulator emphasized that this provision is tailored to support national public health goals rather than grant blanket authorization for general allopathic prescribing.
Besides, the Commission cited Sub-regulation (7) of Regulation 14 of the NCH (BHMS Degree Course) Regulations, 2022, which formally recognizes the role of homoeopathic graduates within government health facilities. The regulatory framework explicitly envisages clinical training for BHMS students in government hospitals and mandates that students ‘participate actively in different National Health Programmes implemented by the state government’, reinforcing their role as integrated contributors to public health infrastructure.
The NCH stated that the public circular was deemed necessary to ensure that Regulation 36 (y) and its proviso are understood, applied, and reported in their correct legal perspective. By distinguishing between unauthorized cross-practice and sanctioned participation in public health programmes, the Commission seeks to quell administrative ambiguities that have fuelled friction between state health departments, modern medicine councils, and alternative medicine bodies.
As medical associations in Maharashtra continue to demand strict regulatory boundaries and challenge state-level bridge course registrations, the NCH's authoritative ruling provides a critical statutory benchmark clarifying where ethical boundaries end and government-authorized public health duties begin.
|