New Delhi, Mar 5: The Supreme Court on Tuesday left it to the states to take appropriate policy decisions to protect patients and their attendants from being “fleeced” and taken “undue advantage” of after a PIL alleged that they are compelled to purchase medicines and medical devices at a higher rate from pharmacies run at private hospitals.
The apex court also stressed that any mandatory direction by it may hamper the functioning of private hospitals and have a cascading effect.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh disposed of a PIL filed by a law student Siddharth Dalmia and his advocate father Vijay Pal Dalmia that alleged that the private hospitals compel the patients and their attendants to purchase medicines from in-house pharmacies or those with which they have collaboration, and they are charged higher rates for medicines, implants and medical devices.
The bench said, “We dispose of this petition with direction to all state governments to consider this issue and take appropriate policy decisions as they deem fit.”
Noting that health is a state subject, the bench said relevant regulatory measures can be taken by the state governments keeping their local conditions in mind.
Highlighting that the issue falls in the policy domain, the bench said it is for the policymakers to take a holistic view of the matter and frame appropriate guidelines ensuring there is no exploitation of the patients and their attendants and, at the same time, there is no discouragement and an unreasonable restriction for the private entities to enter the health sector.
The top court said it would not be advisable for the court to issue any mandatory directions on the PIL to private hospitals but emphasised the need to sensitise the state governments about the alleged problem of fleecing and exploitation of patients and their attendants by private hospitals taking undue advantage of their conditions.
The bench said under the Constitution, the state is obligated to provide better health facilities to its citizenry but due to the rise in population, it had to take the help of private hospitals to cater to the needs of its people.
It said citizens’ right to better health facilities is a right traceable to Article 21 of the Constitution.
Lauding the contribution made by private hospitals in the health sector which are well-known across the world, the bench said any mandatory direction by the court may hamper their functioning and may have a cascading effect.
Taking note of the Centre’s stand that there is no compulsion upon the patients or their attendants to take medicines, implants or medical equipment from hospital pharmacies or from a specific shop, the bench wondered whether it would be prudent for the Union or States to introduce a policy which regulates each and every activity of the private hospitals.
On May 14, 2018, the top court agreed to hear the PIL which alleged that the prices of medicines, medical devices and medical consumables were inflated in collaboration and connivance with the drug manufacturers.
The father of the petitioner contended that by taking advantage of the ignorance, plight and adverse circumstances of the patients in hospitals across India, people were being compelled to buy medicines from there or their in-house pharmacies.
Highlighting the problems faced during the treatment of his mother who was last year diagnosed with breast cancer and has now recovered, the petitioner in his plea said she had to undergo surgery, which was to be followed by six rounds of chemotherapy and other treatments along with Biceltis injections every 21 days.
The plea said that during the course of treatment, it came to their notice that Biceltis injection was sold to them at an MRP of Rs 61,132, while the same medicine manufactured and marketed by the same company was being sold in the open market at a discounted rate of Rs 50,000.
Besides, on purchase of four injections, one injection was given free of cost to the patient towards the patients’ support programme by the company.
The plea said that by giving a free injection, the effective cost per injection came to around Rs 41,000, but it was being sold at an MRP of Rs.61,132.
Dalmia contended that the hospital and their in-house pharmacies did not give them the free injection, being offered by the medicine company, and they, for the first time, realised the existence of an organized methodology adopted by the hospitals, nursing homes and health care institutions for “fleecing and looting” patients by compelling to buy medicines only from them.
“These acts of financial malpractices by the hospitals all over India are against the humans, humanity, morality and the right of the citizens of India to live a dignified and respectable life and the fact that it is also obligatory on the Respondents to provide best and affordable health care to the citizens of India,” the plea said.
The plea said that these hospitals and in-house pharmacies gave no choice or opportunity to the patients and their attendants to buy medicines from other licensed and authorised pharmacies, retailers, dealers and distributors from the open market.
The plea sought a direction that the patients and their attendants shall be free to have the choice of purchasing medicines, medical devices and implants and medical consumables from the vendors of their choice and hospitals cannot compel them to buy them only from their pharmacies.
It also sought direction to the Centre and all the states to ban such malpractices and protect the interests of the buyers of medicines, medical devices and implants, and medical consumables. (PTI)
