The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed concern over the enforcement of rules regulating drug marketing practices, observing that the real challenge lies not in framing norms but in ensuring their proper implementation.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a plea seeking a uniform code to curb unethical promotional tactics by pharmaceutical companies. During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued that the petition had become infructuous as a statutory regime was already in place.
“The difficulty is, regime is there in place, but whether that is actually implemented or not,” Justice Nath remarked.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, also appearing in the case, pointed out that a new framework had been introduced last year. Justice Mehta observed, “That is what the concern of mylords is, that if it is a toothless tiger… what is the purpose?”
Countering this, the Solicitor General said, “It is a tiger with all power at its command.”
UCPMP 2024 Under Scrutiny
The Uniform Code for Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices (UCPMP) 2024 came into force last year, aimed at regulating how companies promote medicines. The Solicitor General urged the court to list the matter on a non-miscellaneous day, stating that the issue may require detailed hearing. The bench has posted the case for further consideration on October 7.
Background
The case stems from a petition filed by the Federation of Medical and Sales Representatives Association of India. In March 2022, the apex court had sought the Centre’s response on the matter. The plea sought binding guidelines to regulate marketing practices until a strong legal framework was in place.
It highlighted that the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002 impose restrictions on doctors from accepting gifts, hospitality, or monetary benefits from pharmaceutical firms. However, these rules do not extend to the companies themselves, creating what the petitioners described as an “anomalous situation.”
Allegations Of Unethical Practices
The plea alleged that drug manufacturers routinely offer indirect incentives—such as foreign trips, entertainment, or sponsored events—to doctors in exchange for increased prescriptions. Such practices, it argued, could influence prescription patterns, leading to over-prescription, irrational drug combinations, and health risks for patients.
The petitioners further contended that despite repeated discussions on curbing these practices, there is still no enforceable law that directly regulates pharmaceutical companies’ promotional strategies, allowing misconduct to continue unchecked
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
