The Supreme Court heard a PIL seeking statutory backing to curb pharma freebies to doctors under UCPMP. The Bench questioned enforcement while SG Tushar Mehta assured, “It’s a tiger with teeth.”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday heard a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the Federation of Medical & Sales Representatives Association of India. The petition seeks to give statutory backing to the Uniform Code of Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices (UCPMP) so that pharma companies can be stopped from offering freebies to doctors in exchange for prescribing their medicines.
The matter came before a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Court,
ALSO READ: P&H High Court asks Haryana to reply on Gurugram bad roads, encroachment PIL
“A statutory regime already exists, but I’ll need time to place it before court.”
Justice Vikram Nath responded sharply and asked,
“Regime is there, but is it actually being enforced?”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the parties, informed the Court that
“In 2024, a new regulatory framework was introduced.”
ALSO READ: Dharmasthala Case Twist: Court Extends SIT Custody of Complainant Chinnaiah till Sept 6
However, Justice Sandeep Mehta raised a concern about its effectiveness, remarking,
“If it’s a toothless tiger, what’s the purpose?”
To this, Solicitor General Mehta countered, saying,
“It’s a tiger with teeth.”
After hearing the submissions, the Court agreed to give time for the government to place the details of the regulatory framework before it. On the joint request made by SG Tushar Mehta and Sr Adv Kapil Sibal, the Bench ordered that the case be listed again on October 7.
It claimed,
“This code is enforceable against doctors, however, does not apply to drug companies, leading to anomalous situations where doctors’ licenses are cancelled for misconduct which is actuated, encouraged, aided, and abetted by pharma companies. The pharma companies go scot-free,”
The Court also clarified that Writ Petition (C) 794/2023 is tagged along with this case, meaning both matters will be heard together.
This case is significant because it addresses transparency and ethics in the pharmaceutical sector. The Court’s observation highlights the concern about whether existing rules are truly implemented or remain ineffective.
The upcoming hearing in October is expected to bring more clarity on how the government plans to strictly enforce measures to prevent pharma companies from giving doctors unlawful incentives.
Click Here To Read More Reports On Freebie Ban
