Ludhiana: Consumer panel fines two pharma firms over stapler pin in medicine

The complainant, a retired district attorney suffering from multiple age-related ailments, had purchased ORO Plus tablets from a local chemist in September 2022

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana, has directed two pharmaceutical firms to jointly pay ₹1 lakh as compensation to a 74-year-old city resident after a stapler pin was found inside a pain-relief tablet that he had consumed. The order was passed recently by commission president Sanjeev Batra and member Monika Bhagat.

The pharmaceutical firms have been directed to pay the compensation within 30 days. (HT Photo)

The complainant, a retired district attorney suffering from multiple age-related ailments, had purchased ORO Plus tablets from a local chemist in September 2022. One night, after swallowing a tablet, he felt a sharp object lodged in his throat, triggering choking, breathlessness and a sudden spike in blood pressure. His family administered repeated abdominal thrusts, following which the tablet was expelled. To their shock, a stapler pin was found inside the tablet.

The commission recorded that the incident caused physical injury, panic and severe mental agony to the complainant. The medicine was manufactured by Kaalinga Pharmaceuticals and marketed by Primula Pharmaceuticals. The chemist was later implicated as a party to the case.

While the chemist admitted to selling the medicine in sealed packaging, the two pharmaceutical firms failed to satisfy the commission on how such a lapse could have occurred.

One of the firms also chose not to contest the proceedings.

During the hearing, the commission examined the recovered tablet and observed that the product was “hazardous to the life and safety of the complainant.”

Holding the manufacturer and marketer liable under the product liability provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the commission ruled that the complainant had clearly suffered harm and distress due to a manufacturing defect. It further noted that the firms neither conducted an independent inquiry nor recalled the batch to safeguard other consumers.

The commission, however, granted relief to the chemist, observing that there was no evidence of tampering or negligence at the retail level and that the shop had sold the medicine in sealed condition.

The pharmaceutical firms have been directed to pay the compensation within 30 days, failing which the amount will attract 8% annual interest from the date of the order. Their liability has been fixed jointly and severally.

The commission observed that timely intervention by the complainant’s family helped avert a tragedy, while stressing the need to protect consumers from hazardous and defective products.