<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!--<!DOCTYPE nitf SYSTEM "nitf-3-4.dtd">-->
<nitf>
  <head>
    <title id="Title">#Title</title>
    <docdata management-doc-idref="">
      <date.issue id="CreationDate" norm="" />
      <du-key id="rev-ver" generation="1" version="Default" />
      <du-key id="Parent-Version" version="" />
      <identified-content>
        <classifier id="newspro-nitf" value="r2" />
        <classifier id="Newspro-App" value="Epaper" />
        <classifier id="Content-Type" value="Story" />
        <classifier id="storyID" value="" />
        <classifier id="CmsConID" value="" />
        <classifier id="Desk" value="" />
        <classifier id="Source" value="" />
        <classifier id="Edition" value="" />
        <classifier id="Category" value="-1" />
        <classifier id="UserName" value="" />
        <classifier id="PublicationDate" value="30/09/2026" />
        <classifier id="PublicationName" value="HI" />
        <classifier id="IsPublished" value="Y" />
        <classifier id="IsPlaced" value="Y" />
        <classifier id="IsCompleated" value="N" />
        <classifier id="IsProofed" value="N" />
        <classifier id="User" value="" />
        <classifier id="Headline-Count" value="" />
        <classifier id="Slug-Count" value="0" />
        <classifier id="Photo-Count" value="0" />
        <classifier id="Caption-Count" value="0" />
        <classifier id="Word-Count" value="0" />
        <classifier id="Character-Count" value="0" />
        <classifier id="Location" value="" />
        <classifier id="TemplateType" value="1" />
        <classifier id="StoryType" value="Story" />
        <classifier id="Author" value="" />
        <classifier id="UOM" value="mm" />
		<classifier id="NumCol" value="0" />
        <classifier id="kicker" value="" />
        <classifier id="ByLine" value="" />
        <classifier id="DateLine" value="" />
        <classifier id="box-geometry" value="153,261,955,571" />
         <classifier id="Layer" value="Default"/>
          <classifier id="numcol" value="7"/>
         <classifier id="ArticleStyle" value=""/>
       <classifier id="Epaper-Build" value="7.96.0.0"/>
  <classifier id="ProcessingDateTime" value="Tue Sep 29 2026 21:54:05 GMT+0530"/>
      </identified-content>

      <urgency id="home-page" ed-urg="0" />
      <urgency id="priority" ed-urg="0" />
      <doc-scope id="scope" value="0" />
    </docdata>
    <pubdata type="print" name="HI" date.publication="20260930T000000+5.30" edition.name="NDI" edition.area="NDI" position.section="30MAIN01FNDI" position.sequence="1" ex-ref="30MAIN01FNDI.indd" />
  </head>
  <body boxBorderWeightColor="" boxBorderWeight="">
<body.head>
      <hedline>
    	<hl2 id="Headline1" class="1" style="Headline2">
		<lang class="3" style="Headline2"  font="Placard Condensed" fontStyle="Regular" size="67">SC raps 10-time markup on cancer drugs</lang>
	</hl2>

       </hedline>
</body.head>
    <body.content id="Bodytext" CaptionAsBody="0">
     <block>
	<media id="1" media-type="image">
		<media-reference id="tn" source-credit="" data-location="1" source="1pills_1_NDI_tn.jpg"  Units="pixels" width="50" height="50"></media-reference>
	</media>
</block>

     <p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">Hans News Service
New Delhi</lang>
</p>
<p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">TheSupreme Court on Tuesday expressed strong concern over hospitals and pharmacies charging exorbitant markups on cancer medicines, questioning why a drug supplied to retailers for ₹2,700 carries an MRP of ₹27,000.</lang>
</p>
<p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said, “This is carnage. Plain and simple,” while hearing petitions concerning drug pricing, generic prescriptions and medical devices under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order (DPCO), 2013.</lang>
</p>
<p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">The bench questioned the distinction between essential and non-essential medicines and suggested a uniform 16 per cent margin on MRP for all medicines. It asked the Centre to examine why such a huge gap exists between the price to retailers and the MRP. The court also asked the government to examine complaints that some corporate hospitals require patients to purchase medicines from their own chemists or specified pharmacies, with treatment assurances allegedly linked to such purchases. The bench noted that government schemes ultimately involve taxpayer-funded reimbursements.</lang>
</p>
<p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said the issue required attention and sought two weeks to consult officials and find a balance between competing interests. The court posted the matter for further hearing on October 12. The bench also questioned the economics of commonly prescribed medicines, citing the example of a statin costing around ₹40 and a combination with aspirin costing ₹70.</lang>
</p>
<p style=".Bodylaser">
	<lang class="3" style=".Bodylaser" font="Minion Pro" fontStyle="Regular" size="9">The petitions before the court highlight concerns over medicine pricing, particularly non-scheduled formulations, which constitute a substantial market portion and have greater pricing flexibility subject toregulatory limits.</lang>
</p>
undefined
    </body.content>
  </body>
</nitf>