Cancer drug costs Rs 2,700, sells for Rs 27,000: SC questions 10x markup at hospitals

The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up hospitals for selling cancer drugs at a steep markup of ten times and asked the Centre to examine whether a uniform 16% margin should apply to all medicines.

The bench also questioned corporate hospitals that require patients to buy medicines only from their own chemists.

“This is carnage. Plain and simple. The cancer drug is priced at an MRP of Rs 27,000 despite being supplied to retailers for Rs 2,700,” a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.


The court said that the system places the burden on patients and taxpayers, especially when treatment is covered under government schemes.

The SC bench also aksed the Centre to investigate hospitals that make it mandatory for patients to purchase medicines from their own pharmacies.

“If that patient is taking treatment under a government scheme, who reimburses? The taxpayer does. So why not uniform criteria?” Justice Mehta asked.

The bench was hearing petitions on medicine pricing, generic prescriptions and medical device controls under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013.

“Why this distinction? Essential or non-essential does not matter? Why not keep a 16 per cent margin on MRP of everything?” Justice Mehta said.

The Solicitor General said he would discuss the issue with government officials and agreed that it required attention. He sought two weeks to examine the matter.

The bench also questioned the difference in prices between medicines sold without combinations and those sold with combinations.

“Corporate hospitals are industries. It is not a service at all. Why should the common man suffer all this?” the bench said.

Justice Mehta questioned who benefits from the high markups and said the court would examine the issue in detail.

“Ultimately, the loser is the honest taxpayer. We will examine this issue thoroughly. This affects a large section of the society,” the bench said.

The Solicitor General said pharmaceutical companies did not appear to be the main beneficiaries of the markups and that a balance would have to be found.

The court posted the matter for further hearing on October 12 and asked the Centre to respond.

One of the petitions, filed by Kishan Chand Jain, said scheduled medicines are subject to ceiling prices, while non-scheduled formulations—estimated to account for around 80% or more of the market by number and value—give manufacturers greater flexibility in fixing maximum retail prices.

The petition sought stricter price controls under the DPCO and action against alleged overpricing and unfair practices in the drug supply chain. Another plea sought disciplinary action against medical practitioners who do not prescribe generic medicines.

On September 22, the Supreme Court had described the overpricing of essential cancer medicines as a “broad daylight dacoity” against patients. It had questioned why authorities responsible for acting against such practices had remained silent.