Dear Readers, we are happy to share the most interesting legal and policy updates concerning health industry that we read today. We hope you enjoy reading it.
1. Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) has rejected a cosmetics import registration certificate and barred the importer from seeking fresh registrations for one year over alleged submission of fabricated documents under the Cosmetics Rules, 2020. The move underscores stricter regulatory scrutiny and tougher enforcement of compliance standards in India’s cosmetics import sector.
Source: shortlink.uk/1vfpf
2. India’s Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the conviction of a clinic owner under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act 1994, observing that lapses in maintaining mandatory records, including Form ‘F’, cannot be treated as minor procedural defects. The Court emphasized that proper documentation is central to enforcement of the PCPNDT framework aimed at preventing female foeticide and preserving regulatory oversight of diagnostic practices. This is important as the ruling reinforces strict compliance expectations for clinics, diagnostic centres, and healthcare establishments operating under the PCPNDT regime. The judgment signals that deficiencies in statutory records may attract penal consequences even where procedural irregularities in inspection or search are alleged.
Source: shortlink.uk/1vfr5
3. Parliamentary Standing Committee has reportedly recommended expansion of Regional Raw Drug Repositories under the National Medicinal Plants Board, particularly in biodiversity-rich regions, to support documentation, authentication, conservation, and sustainable utilisation of medicinal plants used in Ayush systems. The recommendation reflects continued policy attention toward strengthening medicinal plant infrastructure and raw material quality within the herbal and phytopharmaceutical ecosystem.
Source: shortlink.uk/1pTkP
4. The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) of India has launched a probe into the online sale of an allegedly unregistered herbicide on major e-commerce platforms, citing concerns over regulatory non-compliance and inadequate product disclosures. The action underscores rising scrutiny of hazardous products sold online and may push platforms to strengthen seller verification and compliance mechanisms.
Source: shortlink.uk/1vfpx
5. The Bombay High Court held that although infringement relief was unavailable in the “OCTRIDE” and “OTIDE” dispute due to both marks being registered, passing off protection could still be granted under common law. The Court cited the marks phonetic similarity, the Plaintiff’s prior goodwill and market reputation, and the heightened risk of confusion in pharmaceutical products.
Source: shortlink.uk/1pTl0