The case pertains to bringing down Ribociclib’s price through domestic manufacture, a request the Centre rejected on the grounds that breast cancer did not meet the threshold of national urgency.

The original petitioner, a breast cancer patient, died during the pendency of the proceedings. The HC then expanded the scope of the matter and converted it into a suo motu PIL concerning the pricing and accessibility of life-saving medicines.

The SC’s intervention follows a July 10 representation to the Chief Justice of the Kerala HC, with copies to the President and the CJI, from Jyotsna Singh and K M Gopakumar, co-convenors of the Working Group on Access to Medicines and Treatment. The letter sought urgent administrative intervention to fast-track the case, noting that pleadings had long concluded even as the matter kept coming up without a final hearing.

The representation stated that Ribociclib costs Rs 78,468 per month and remains under patent protection. It said the original petition sought a government-use licence under the Patents Act to facilitate the manufacture of a lower-cost version of the medicine.

The group said that “the untimely demise of the petitioner in this matter highlights the devastating human cost of judicial delays in cases involving access to lifesaving drugs”.

On July 15, the Kerala HC, in the suo motu PIL titled ‘In Re Exorbitant Pricing of Life Saving Patented Medicines’, sought expert opinions from the National Cancer Institute, Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram and the Drugs Controller General of India on whether Palbociclib, a less expensive medicine available in India, could serve as an alternative to Ribociclib and Abemaciclib.