A recent analysis reflects on the limitations of India’s patent law provisions relying on Sections 92 and 100, highlighting the ongoing Ribociclib litigation as a critical case study. The emphasis is laid on the infrastructure challenges rather than merely legal impediments in improving access to patented medications.
Access to Medicines: A Structural Challenge in India
In a reflective two-part analysis, Rishabh Upadhyay explores the underutilization of Sections 92 and 100 of the Indian patent law concerning improving access to life-saving medications, particularly focusing on the Riboiclib case before the Kerala High Court. It posits that while legal mechanisms exist to facilitate compulsory licensing, practical access issues rooted in infrastructural deficiencies prevail.
The discussion delves into the necessity for the Indian legal framework to evolve beyond mere statutory provisions and recognize underlying systemic barriers, thus framing the access to medicines challenge as predominantly infrastructural. Upscaling procurement and distribution frameworks is discussed as pivotal for translating legal rights into tangible access for patients requiring critical medicines.
This analysis invites practitioners to reevaluate the interpretation of patent laws in light of practical accessibility concerns, urging a multi-faceted approach that combines legal scrutiny with an understanding of market dynamics and infrastructural capabilities.
Citations
- Biocon Ltd v. Assistant Controller of Patents (2026) Kerala HC
