SC rejects bail plea of doctor accused of prescribing cough syrup linked to 26 child deaths

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana declined to entertain the plea, pointing out that charges had been framed against Soni only recently and that the stockist involved in the case was his relative, suggesting possible connections that required closer scrutiny.

“This is not a case of bail. You will have to wait. Charges have been framed just recently. And the stockist happens to be your relative. There are some connections,” the bench told senior advocate Siddhartha Dave, appearing for Soni.

When Dave argued that his client had only prescribed the medicine and was neither its manufacturer nor involved in its production, the bench underscored the gravity of the allegations, particularly given his professional qualifications.

“Children died...it is very serious. Twenty-six children died. The fact that you are a qualified doctor is all the more serious,” remarked the bench.

The court further observed that unless the prosecution was unable to establish the requisite knowledge on Soni’s part, the case could attract a punishment of life imprisonment.

“Unless you can prove absence of requisite knowledge, it is a case of life imprisonment,” said the court, before dismissing the petition. The court, however, permitted Soni to renew his bail plea after a year.

Soni, who was posted at the Civil Hospital in Parasia in Madhya Pradesh’s Chhindwara district, was arrested on October 5, 2025, following a complaint by the block medical officer, Dr Ankit Sehlam. He faces charges under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), as well as provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.

The first child death linked to Coldrif was reported in Chhindwara on September 4, 2025. However, the syrup allegedly continued to be prescribed even as more cases emerged. Investigations subsequently revealed the presence of diethylene glycol (DEG), a toxic industrial solvent, in alarmingly high concentrations in samples of the medicine.

Laboratory reports cited by the prosecution found DEG levels of up to 46.28% weight by volume in the syrup, against the permissible limit of 0.1%. The chemical, commonly used in industrial products such as brake fluid and antifreeze, can cause acute kidney injury and potentially fatal kidney failure, particularly in children.

According to the prosecution, children between two and four years of age were prescribed the syrup by Soni, following which they developed acute kidney injuries and were referred to a medical college hospital in Nagpur, where several died.

The prosecution has alleged that Soni’s wife, Jyoti Soni, who was working at Apna Medical Store, a pharmacy owned by her husband and located adjacent to his clinic, sold the syrup without prescriptions. It further alleged that Soni received a 10% commission on every bottle prescribed, while the pharmacy earned a profit of ₹23 per bottle, pointing to an alleged arrangement between the couple to prescribe and sell the medicine.

The state also alleged that Soni continued prescribing the syrup despite a December 18, 2023, circular issued by the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization prohibiting fixed-dose combination cough syrups for children below four years of age. The prosecution further claimed that he had been cautioned by a senior paediatrician in Nagpur about a similar tragedy involving DEG-contaminated cough syrup in Delhi in 1998.

Soni’s defence has maintained that he was neither the manufacturer nor involved in the production of the syrup, which was manufactured by Sresan Pharmaceuticals Ltd under a valid licence. His counsel also argued that the medicine had not been banned when it was prescribed and relied on the Supreme Court’s 2005 judgment in Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab, which laid down safeguards against criminal prosecution of medical practitioners without appropriate expert opinion.

The Madhya Pradesh high court had rejected Soni’s second bail application on June 30, 2026, holding that there was no change in circumstances since his first bail plea was dismissed on February 17, except for the additional period spent in custody. The high court had declined relief despite his contention that the trial would take considerable time.