The bill seeking death penalty for spurious drug makers and the third patent amendment bill are most likely to lapse as the government announced its decision to dissolve the Lok Sabha in early March.

The time until then will be too short to discuss, resolve and okay the bills for such sensitive issues although the Union cabinet approved them during the third week of December. The two bills are supposed to be tabled in the parliament in the current winter session. The patent amendment bill would permit product patents from 2005 onwards.

"I think both the bills are likely to lapse in this Lok Sabha. After the elections, the process of bill identification and approval will have to start afresh, which again will take time," said DG Shah, secretary general, IPA.

Some experts maintain that if the current ruling party is not back in the next election, then it is left entirely to the new party to study the pros and cons and approving the bills before tabling it in the parliament. Here, there is also likelihood for a matter like death penalty to be rejected, they said.

However the officials welcome the situation as they feel more time is required for the bills to be discussed across different quarters of the industry and in the media, before it becomes a law. "Sensitive matters like death penalty for spurious drug manufacturers and patent cannot be okayed in a months period. More time is required to get a consensus over these matters," said senior patent lawyer Narendra Zaveri.

Spurious drug activity can go to any extremes. Although misprinting the name of an ingredient on the label of a product and filling a capsule with chalk powder are spurious drug activities, the former could not be as life threatening as the latter. Laws have to be charted in such a way that a death penalty is imposed only to severe cases where lives of individuals are involved. "Only after we get answers to all the legal parameters involved, the bill must be okayed, which would obviously take time," said Zaveri.

In patent amendment bill, there has to be viable provisions for pre-patent grant rejection and compulsory licensing, he said. "In case of a calamity, the patent amendment should not be advantageous to MNCs to delay permitting Indian companies with compulsory licenses. Moreover the amendment should not help MNC to take the country to WTO in case an IPR related dispute ignites with any Indian company," said Zaveri.