Supreme Court asks Centre to frame statutory rules for pharma marketing

The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to constitute a committee to examine statutory regulations on pharmaceutical marketing, including gifts and incentives offered to doctors

The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday directed the Centre to constitute a committee to examine and recommend statutory regulations governing pharmaceutical (pharma) companies’ marketing practices, including gifts and other benefits offered to doctors to promote their products.

 

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said the committee would consider suggestions and representations on the issue and make recommendations to the Union government. The matter will be taken up on January 29, 2027, for consideration of the Centre’s compliance affidavit.

 

The order came on a petition filed by the Federation of Medical and Sales Representatives’ Associations of India and others seeking a legally enforceable framework to regulate pharma companies’ promotion of medicines among healthcare professionals.

 

 

The dispute centres on practices in which drug companies provide doctors with gifts, hospitality, travel facilities, monetary benefits or other incentives as part of product promotion. The concern raised before the court is that such benefits can influence doctors’ prescribing decisions, potentially increasing prescriptions of particular medicines and adding to patients’ healthcare costs.

 

The case also concerns the Uniform Code for Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices (UCPMP), 2024, issued by the Department of Pharmaceuticals to regulate interactions between drug companies and healthcare professionals. The code prohibits pharma companies and their agents from providing personal gifts, monetary benefits, and hospitality to doctors and their family members. It also restricts companies from extending travel facilities to healthcare professionals for conferences and similar events, subject to specified conditions.

 

The SC had earlier questioned whether the UCPMP had adequate enforcement mechanisms and whether it should be given statutory backing.

 

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said the Centre proposed a three-member committee to examine whether a statutory framework was necessary and, if so, what form it should take.

 

The Centre said existing regulations provided for disciplinary action against doctors accepting gifts, travel, hospitality or monetary grants from pharma companies.

 

The petitioners, however, argued that there was no comparable statutory mechanism to penalise companies offering such inducements.

 

Senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for the petitioners, also pointed out that the Centre had informed the court in 2022 that a high-level committee had already examined the need for a legally enforceable mechanism.

 

The petitioners relied on the SC’s 2022 judgment in M/s Apex Laboratories versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.

 

In that case, the court held that pharma companies could not claim tax deductions for freebies provided to doctors and noted that such benefits could influence prescriptions. The court had referred to examples including gold coins, electronic goods, and funding of foreign trips and medical conferences.