The Delhi High Court on Monday pulled up the Drug Controller of Delhi for conducting an "unsatisfactory" inquiry into the procurement and distribution of FabiFlu by Member of Parliament from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Gautam Gambhir. (Dr Deepak Singh v. Union of India).

Calling the status report "trash", a Division Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh stated that it appeared that the Drug Controller had not examined as to how Gautam Gambhir Foundation could have procured the drug, Fabiflu, from dealers/retailers in such large quantities in terms of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

"How could such a large stock be given to a foundation which is not a medical practitioner? We dare say it is not permissible...We reject this status report...this is trash. There is no legal basis to it," the Court opined.

Counsel for Drug Controller, Additional Standing Counsel Nandita Rao informed the Court that drug was procured from several licensed dealers/retailers in a phased manner after a letter was received from one Garg Hospital.

As Rao proceeded to state that the procurement saved several lives and that the drug was "available in ample supply" otherwise, the Court remarked,

"Here is a man who is hoarding thousands of strips of medicines. He is interrupting the flow of medicines...Please don't tell us there is no shortage. We know there was shortage."

It further remarked,

"If you think we are so gullible, so naive, we are not...you better do your job. We will have you suspended and let someone else do your job. You are wrong to say it was not in short supply. You want us to shut our eyes. You think you would get away with this..."

Allowing the Drug Controller to file a fresh status report, the Court said,

"Our confidence is shaken. It is entirely up to you to restore it."

The Court also took strong exception to Gautam Gambhir's statement to the media that he was ready for any punishment and would continue to save lives.

"We've already said it is a malpractice. This tendency of people trying to take advantage and then trying to appear as saviour...this has to be denounced. And then the person says he would do it again. We know how to deal with it...", the Court remarked.

The Court also rejected the submission that the procurement was made as per the patient requirement.

"Time was of the essence. He bought more than what is required. How is it that dealer has sold it to a foundation?" the Court questioned as it noted that there were over 280 leftover strips.

Amicus Curiae in the matter, Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao also made submissions. He emphasised that the camp was held at a time when people were running helter-skelter for FabliFlu. He also stated that it ought to be examined if any record of the distribution was maintained at the medical camp.

The Court made the remarks in a plea alleging that political leaders like Gautam Gambhir were hoarding, transferring and distributing crucial COVID-19 medicines at a time when they were not available to the public at large.

Counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Virag Gupta asked that if there was enough stock of Fabiflu with dealers as submitted by the Drug Controller, how was it not available with the chemists.

"This was hoarding only...they (authorities) have booked thousands of common persons for not wearing masks. But when it comes to VIPs, they call it technical violation," Gupta argued.

He also said that there was a discrepancy in the reports filed by the police and the Drug Controller regarding the location from where the medicines were distributed by Gautam Gambhir Foundation.

Assistant Drug Controller KR Chawla sought time from the Court to file an improved report. Rao said that the report was prepared in haste to meet the deadline and was only preliminary in nature.

The Court also rejected the report of the distribution of oxygen by MLA Praveen Kumar.

Advocate Satya Ranjan, for the applicant Vedansh Anand, informed the Court that as was being claimed, there could not have been any supply of oxygen from Bhatinda in view of an administrative order barring supply to any industry or individual.

The Court, however, accepted the status report in respect of supply of five oxygen cylinders by MLA Priti Tomar to a hospital.

"Here there is a hospital with infants on ventilator and they made a call to the ex MLA...This is not a case of breach of law in that sense. Cylinders were of the hospital...we don't know if they contacted the nodal officer...maybe they made other attempts. Let's not unnecessarily victimise someone who has tried to help. There is no illegality," the Court said.

The matter will be heard next on June 3.