ECI affidavit to Court has unresolved questions, unbroken silences

The Supreme Court scrutinized the government's stance on escalating medicine prices on Tuesday, raising inquiries about why economic factors should take precedence over citizens' well-being and why pharmaceutical firms are permitted to charge exorbitant rates for essential medications. A bench led by justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta questioned the substantial disparity between the maximum retail price (MRP) and the price to retailers (PTR), emphasizing the gravity of the situation beyond mere commerce.

The bench queried if governmental economic policies should supersede the lives of citizens. The government's response to the court's deliberation was that it had capped trade margins on 137 anti-cancer drugs to 30% of the MRP, which the court acknowledged would result in annual savings of approximately ₹2,500 crore for patients.

However, the bench pointed out that this decision was a response to the court's intervention, prompting the question of why certain medicines are not encompassed within the scheduled drugs category, thereby remaining outside the Drug Price Control Order (DPCO). The additional solicitor general argued that while the government aimed to protect investment and competition, it affirmed that Indian pharmaceutical products were among the most affordable globally.

The court also cited instances where private hospitals charged patients significantly more than a medicine distributor who procured an anti-cancer drug directly from the manufacturer at a fraction of the cost. The bench lamented the lack of bargaining power among patients, highlighting multiple examples of heavily priced drugs and devices.

The court criticized the government's affidavit for omitting three parliamentary committee reports on drug pricing, suggesting that these reports were inconvenient to present. The government defended its actions by citing the provision of generic drugs through PM Jan Aushadi Kendras and the calibration of prices for non-scheduled drugs.

Legal representatives of both the government and private hospitals argued before the court, with the latter suggesting the formation of a panel to investigate potential misuse of funds by the healthcare sector. The regulation of drugs as an essential commodity under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the Drug (Prices Control) Order, 2013, issued by the Centre under this provision, was noted by the court.