https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168607 Commercial advertisements promoting medicines were treated as outside the core protection of free speech where the Act's dominant object was to prevent self-medication and protect the public, so the Article 19 challenge to the advertisement restrictions failed. The enabling words in Section 3(d) were held to confer uncontrolled delegated power because no criteria or guiding standards were provided for specifying diseases or conditions, so that delegation was unconstitutional while the rest of the section remained severable. Section 8 was also invalidated because seizure and detention of documents and goods were allowed without adequate procedural safeguards, making the provision an unreasonable restriction on fundamental rights and not meaningfully severable. en-us Fri, 18 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Mar 2015 18:46:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168607 Commercial advertisements promoting medicines were treated as outside the core protection of free speech where the Act's dominant object was to prevent self-medication and protect the public, so the Article 19 challenge to the advertisement restrictions failed. The enabling words in Section 3(d) were held to confer uncontrolled delegated power because no criteria or guiding standards were provided for specifying diseases or conditions, so that delegation was unconstitutional while the rest of the section remained severable. Section 8 was also invalidated because seizure and detention of documents and goods were allowed without adequate procedural safeguards, making the provision an unreasonable restriction on fundamental rights and not meaningfully severable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Dec 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168607