S.L.A.P. [ SHSHANK LAW AWARENESS PROGRAM ]: December 2014

YYes, Homoeopathic medicines can be safely taken with any other medication without any side effects or interactions. As homoeopathic medicine does not interfere with other therapies, drugs, herbs, vitamins etc. it is safe to use in while taking with other medications.

· How does a homeopath prescribe a particular remedy for a person?

Homeopaths take great care to understand people's symptoms, how they experience illness as well as their general state of being. By rule out the unique symptoms and do individualization according to the patient. The homeopath gains insight into the nature of their vital life force and is thus able to select an appropriate remedy to stimulate it to effect a curative reaction. In homoeopathy we treat the person, not a single disease.

· What type of conditions or diseases can be treated homeopathically? All acute and chronic cases are well treated by homoeopathy. Homeopathy is applicable to a broad range of maladies including acute inflammations, systemic imbalances, chronic degenerative diseases and mental/emotional disturbances. By its very nature, homeopathic treatment is not specific to a particular illness, but is directed at the underlying state of the person suffering from that illness.

· Can homeopathic remedies be taken along with conventional medications?

Yes. Many people who seek out homeopathic care are already taking conventional medication with the goal of reducing or eliminating the medication. With the proper remedy and treatment plan, this is often possible.

· Is it ok for children, pregnant women, elderly people or animals to take homeopathic remedies?

It is absolutely safe. Homeopathy is a wonderful, gentle healing modality appropriate for people of all ages and conditions. It also is extensively used to treat animals.

· Do homeopathic medicines produce any side effects?

Homoeopathic medicines are natural, mild in action and hence completely safe. They do not cause any side effects and are non addictive. This makes them safe for all age groups – babies, children, young people, elderly.

· What should I avoid while taking homoeopathic medicines like onion, garlic, clove, cardamom, Coffee etc?

This is just a myth. In fact, researches have shown that onion, garlic, tea, coffee or any other strong smelling substance do not have any effect on the efficacy of homeopathic medicine. Hence they can be taken safely with homoeopathic medicines.

· What happens during a homeopathic consultation?

Essentially homeopath will listen deeply to you - listening to understand many different aspects of your personality and state of health. Facts of disease, descriptions of pains, emotional reactions, dreams and physical sensations are all relevant, as well as how you move your body and how you react to stress. It is important to express yourself honestly. The better homeopath understands your nature, the easier it will be to find the best remedy for you.

· How frequently is it appropriate to have consultations?

It may differ according to the case. For the first 6 months to year it is best to see the homeopath every 4-6 weeks in most cases. However , this may differ in any particular instance.

· What is Constitutional Homeopathy?

Constitutional prescribing a system of prescribing remedies based on a deep understanding of the individual's basic energetic state. When this basic energy imbalance is corrected, any troublesome symptoms will fall away. Constitutional prescribing is a challenging discipline for which professional homeopaths train and study many years.

· How long does it take to see results?

The result of the medicine depends on whether the disease is acute or chronic. Treatment of acute diseases show result in very short time. For chronic cases, it depends upon the duration ,severity, complexity & suppression of the diseases. Moreover it depends upon the patient individuality and susceptibility.

· How long will the treatment take?

Treatment depends upon the type of disease whether it is acute or chronic. In case of acute disease the result of treatment is very quick e.g. fever, cold. But if the disease is chronic e.g. Eczema, asthma time taken is too long as these diseases are treated according to the severity, complexity, duration and suppression of the disease.

· Is homoeopathic medicines are slow to act?

It is a myth that homeopathic medicines are slow to act. The action of medicine depends upon whether the disease is acute or chronic. In acute diseases (i.e. disease of shorter duration or recent origin) homoeopathy acts faster than any other mode of treatment and produces very quick results, which is safe and not temporary.. However, most of the time the patients visiting the homoeopathic physician are suffering from chronic disease (disease of longer duration) who have been continually suppressed, over drugged or declared incurable by conventional systems of medicine. These cases take time to show response depending upon the severity, complexity and suppression of disease.

· Do i need any diet restriction while on homeopathic treatment?

The diet for every disease is recommended according to the sensitiveness of the patient towards the exogenic factors. There are very few diet restrictions depending upon the individual's sensitivity.

· Is homeopathy harmful during pregnancy or lactation ?

Homoeopathic medicine are very mild and given in minute doses, hence they are perfectly safe to take during pregnancy or lactation. In fact homoeopathic medicines boost up the immunity of the patient thereby allowing the patient to acquire resistance against diseases.

· Is homoeopathic pills are safe for diabetic patients?

Homoeopathic medicine can be safely taken by diabetics as they contain negligible amount of sugar which does not have any effect on the blood sugar levels. Moreover, homoeopathic medicine can be given in distilled water also.

· Do Homeopathic Medicines contain "Steroids"?

NO – homeopathic medicines DO NOT contain any steroids. This is the most disturbing misconception about the homeopathic system of medicine which is safe, effective and has alleviated the suffering of mankind for nearly 200 years. Many patients have voiced their concerns about homeopathic medicines containing "cortisone" (steroids) during a consultation. When they receive the first packet of homeopathic medicines in the form of pills and powders, their suspicions about the steroid content is triggered. If steroids were to be given to a patient why would a conscientious and diligent homeopath spend 3 to 4 hours in a meticulous painstaking case session with a patient?

· Scientific Testing

All homeopathic medicines contain a base of a small amount of lactose (milk sugar) which would give FALSE POSITIVE results when tested using the "Colorimetric method which uses tetrazolium blue salts". In this test, the reaction of tetrazolium blue salt gives a highly colored compound known as Farmazan. Under controlled conditions, the amount of Farmazan developed is proportional to the quantity of steroid or any reducing sugar present in the material being tested. Tetrazolium salts have been used for determination of reducing sugars since the past several years.

· So if any drug contains any lactose, it will impart a strong color with tetazolium blue salt which will give a false impression of the presence

if the alcohol used in this method is not completely free from aldehyde, it will interface with the characteristic color, which may again give a false positive reaction for a steroid. So this method is not advisable to determine the presence of steroids in the drug.

· Most homeopaths use lactose as a base. Together with the alcohol, this is likely to give a false positive test for steroids if this method is used.

Another method used to test steroids is Liberman Buchard test. Thin layer chromatography method and UV absorption method. Almost all steroids show UV absorption between 235 and 240 nm in dehydrated alcohol or methanol in a clear solution. If an ultraviolet spectrum of this solution is taken between 400 nm and 200 nm on a suitable spectrophotometer, any steroid present will show up as a maximum between 235nm and 240 nm. Absence of such a band means absence of steroid.

· When homeopathic remedies were tested for steroids using the UV absorption method, none of the samples showed maximum between 235 nm and 240 nm.

Thus it is clear that homeopathic medicines do not contain any steroids, and one must understand the testing procedures were used to eliminate the possibility of a misleading result.

· Steroids and Homeopathy

The most common Non Specific Test used for testing steroids is the calorimetric method and other tests based on colors development (UV Spectrophotometer). A salt named Tetrazolium; Blue is used commonly in such test. The reaction depends upon the reduction of tetrazoltum blue salt to give a highly colored compound known as Farmazan. Under controlled conditions, the amount of Farmazan developed is proportional to the quantity of steroid or any reducing sugar present in the material being tested.

When homeopathic remedies are tested for steroids using the UV absorption method, none of the samples show up as a maximum between 235nm and 240 nm.Thus it is clear that homeopathic medicines do not contain any steroids, and one must understand the testing procedures used to eliminate the possibility of a misleading result.

Source: http://drnavalkumar.com

Friday 5 December 2014

Supreme Court Changes ground rule under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to prosecute a person…

Supreme Court Changes ground rule under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to prosecute a person who had presented the cheque which bounced for insufficiency of funds. Through this judgment, SC provides relief to the holders of bounced cheques under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act

What is a Negotiable Instrument?

The word negotiable means ‘transferable by delivery’ and the word instrument means ‘a written document by which a right is created in favour of some person’. The transfer should be unrestricted and in good faith.
Therefore, a negotiable instrument is a document guaranteeing the payment of a specific amount of money, either on demand, or at a set time, with the payer named on the document. It is an indebtedness to pay an amount and the negotiable instrument is an unconditional guarantee for the same.

Some Examples of Negotiable instruments are Promissory notes, Cheques, Bills of Exchange, bearer bonds, bank notes etc.

The Indian law on Negotiable instruments is governed by the Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881.

About the Act

The Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 was passed in 1882 and was amended in 1989 and 2002, Before 1988 there was no provision to restrain the person issuing the Cheque without having sufficient funds in his account. The only remedy against a Dishonoured cheque was a civil liability accrued. In order to ensure promptitude and remedy against the defaulters of the Negotiable Instrument a criminal remedy of penalty was inserted in Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by amending it with Negotiable Instruments Act, 1988. The second noteworthy amendment was when the parliament enacted the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2002 which is intended to plug the loopholes. This amendment Act inserts five new sections from 143 to 147 touching various limbs of the parent Act. This act is applicable to the whole of India including the state of Jammu and Kashmir, which was brought under the purview of the act in 1956.

Objective

The objective of the act is to define the various negotiable instruments such a, promissory notes, bills of exchange, cheque etc. Also to prescribe the liability in case of a failure of the instrument to fulfil its debt due to the default on the part of the payer or to curb scrupulous practices adopted to escape liability in respect of negotiable instruments. However, Section 138 in regard to dishonour of cheque attracts criminal liability.

Law on Negotiable Instrument, Section 138

It is manifest that to constitute an offense under Section 138 of the Act; the following ingredients are required to be fulfilled.

1. a person must have drawn a cheque on an account maintained by him in a bank for payment of a certain amount of money to another person from out of that account

2. the cheque should have been issued for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability;

3. that cheque has been presented to bank within a period of three months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity whichever is earlier;

4. that cheque is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with the bank;

5. the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within 30 days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid;

6. the drawer of such cheque fails to make payment of the said amount of money to the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque within 15 days of the receipt of the said notice;

To put it in simpler terms the law stated that the person must owe some amount of money to another and draws a cheque in that regard to fulfil that liability, the cheque be drawn on an account in a bank by him. The cheque was then presented to the bank within 3 months of the date on which it is drawn. However due to insufficiency of funds the cheque is returned by the bank unpaid. The payee (the bank) makes a demand for payment of said amount which the person owed within 30 days of the information received by him (the person who owed the money) that the cheque was returned unpaid; and thereafter the person fails to pay the amount within 15 days of the notice by the bank.

Latest Law

By a landmark judgment, Dashrath Roopsingh Rathod vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

In this case, the Supreme Court has changed the basic criteria under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act which is to prosecute a person who had presented the cheque which had been returned due to insufficiency of funds or if the amount exceeds the amount in the bank of the payer.

Earlier, a case under Section 138 could be initiated by the holder of the cheque at his place of business or residence. But, a bench of justices TS Thakur, Vikramjit Sen and C Nagappan ruled that the case has to be initiated at the place where the branch of the bank on which the cheque was drawn is located.

And the judgment would apply retrospectively. This means, lakhs of cases pending in various courts across the country would witness an interstate transfer of cheque bouncing cases.

The bench said: “In this analysis, we hold that the place, suits or venue of judicial inquiry and trial of the offence must logically be restricted to where the drawee bank is located.”

Example: Mr. X who resides in Chennai owes Rs. 1 Lakh to Mr. B who resides in Chandigarh; Mr. X issues a cheque in Delhi in favour of Mr. B. The cheque bounces in Ludhiana (place of bank where the cheque is given by Mr. B) for insufficiency of funds.

According to the earlier law Mr. X could have chosen any of the four places. But by the recent judgment the only place for institution of case would be Ludhiana, i.e. where the cheque has dishonoured at the payee bank which is located in Ludhiana in this example.

Reasons for passing the new law

The rationale behind this change is that the payers majority being businessmen and traders were using extending credit recklessly and due to the leniency in the provision of Section 138, it was being misused in regards to the place of institution, as sometime the payer had no concern with the place where the cheque was issued and to unnecessarily harass the payee cause hardship of place of institution of case according to their convenience. To curb this practice this judgment aims to get to the root of the issue and resolve it by a strict approach so as to discourage the payer from misusing or carelessly issuing cheques. The hardship of traveling to the location of drawee bank is now on the payer.

The change in the existing law shifts the inconvenience and hardship on the payer because now he would have to travel to the place of the drawee bank where the cheque gets dishonored due to insufficiency of funds. Hence, guaranteeing more precaution by the payer at the time of issuing the cheque.

Source: vakilno1