Supreme Court Seeks Snapdeal's Reply on Prescription Drug Sale Liability
The apex court has sought responses from Snapdeal and its directors on Karnataka's plea challenging a High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings over a third-party seller's prescription drug sale. The case tests intermediary safe-harbour under Section 79 of the IT Act against sector-specific drug laws.
What happened
Supreme Court sought Snapdeal and its directors' reply on Karnataka's plea challenging a High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings over prescription
Key facts
- Section 79 IT Act
- Suhagra-100
- 2019
- February 2022
- July 15
- August 10
Why this matters
Track this case as a precedent-setting test of intermediary liability that could reshape marketplace M&A diligence, indemnity structures, and director-liability provisions in ecommerce deals.
What to watch
- Snapdeal and directors' reply filing content
- SC framing of questions on Section 79 vs special-statute conflict
- Any interim order affecting criminal proceedings
- Parallel MeitY/health ministry moves on online pharmacy rules
- Similar petitions against Amazon/Flipkart citing this case
- Ecommerce platforms audit and restrict prescription-drug and regulated-goods listings pending clarity
- Legal teams file interventions/amicus to protect broad Section 79 interpretation
- Marketplaces accelerate seller-KYC, licensing verification and takedown SLAs
- Industry bodies (IAMAI) coordinate advocacy on intermediary liability limits
Also reported by
- Inc42 · Buzz — Same time