The Bombay High Court had on June 16, expressed concern over people like Member of Legislative Assembly Zeeshan Siddiqui and Bollywood actor Sonu Sood “acting like messiah” which could end up in the distribution of spurious COVID-19 drugs. Sonu Sood has now moved to Bombay High Court seeking an intervention in the PIL pertaining to the illegal supply of COVID-19 drugs.
As per reports, Sood filed the intervention application in a COVID-19 related plea regarding the hoarding and alleged unauthorised distribution of antiviral drugs Remdesivir and Tocilizumab.
According to a report by LiveLaw, Sood has alleged that the petitioner is trying to destroy his philanthropic work, and accused the petitioner of trying to defame him. For the unversed, Sonu Sood has been one of the Bollywood celebrities who has been at the forefront in India’s battle against COVID-19, from helping stranded migrant workers reach home to providing financial and medical assistance to those in need of help.
The report added that a bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni will take up the matter for hearing today.
During the court’s last hearing, Bombay HC had asked Maharashtra Government to investigate the role of Siddique and Sood regarding Remdesivir distribution. The court’s remarks were in response to the state’s submission that inquiry against the Sonu Sood Foundation is still underway. The inquiries are based on an application filed by petitioner Nilesh Navlakha through advocates Rajesh Inamdar and Pankaj Kandhari, where he pointed out the patients approached Bollywood celebrities and politicians through Twitter when they failed to get Remdesivir through lawful official channels.
The report states that in his plea, Sonu has said he has been helping people since the beginning of the pandemic and that following the onslaught of the second wave of COVID-19, people started reaching out to him for help with drugs like Remdesivir and Tocilizumab. The plea added that the actor decided to help out after empathising with the plight of critically ill patients and their relatives who were trying hard to procure the lifesaving drugs.
The application asserted that Sood never stored, hoarded, dealt, distributed, and/or supplied any drugs and claimed that the main problem, according to him was a lack of coordination between the places having the drugs and needy patients, while he merely played the part of a conduit.
Sood, in his plea, not only listed out how he helped the patients but added that the petitioner has tried to destroy his philanthropic work by twisting and misrepresenting the true state of affairs
