The Pharma-Politics of Headache: Saridon, Piramal, DHFL

Posted on 30th September, 2025 (GMT 08:42 hrs)

ABSTRACT

This letter to Mr. Ajay Piramal, framed through the metaphor of Saridon’s “triple action” composition, critiques the intersection of corporate power, judicial indulgence, and regulatory opacity in India. It juxtaposes the systemic injustices surrounding DHFL’s takeover with the ethical concerns of marketing a drug banned worldwide yet freely advertised in India. Paracetamol, Propyphenazone, and Caffeine are deployed symbolically to expose how legality masks long-term damage, structural power deepens inequity, and profit stimulation creates societal precarity. A chronology of judicial decisions highlights the asymmetry between corporate privilege and citizens’ prolonged struggles for justice. The letter denounces the collusion of commerce, law, and politics, invoking the concepts of iatrogenic harm and “medical nemesis” to underscore how quick fixes mask deeper crises. Ultimately, it appeals for accountability: transparent dialogue with DHFL victims, establishment of an independent redressal mechanism, alignment of pharmaceutical and financial practices with global safety norms, and the withdrawal of Saridon from the Indian market.

DISCLAIMER:
This document is an exercise of democratic free speech and non-violent dissent. References to individuals, corporations, legal cases, medicines, and political entities are based on publicly available information, reported events, and judicial or regulatory records. Allegations, where mentioned, are explicitly qualified as “alleged” and are not to be construed as established fact unless confirmed by competent authority or judicial determination. Medical and pharmacological references are employed in a metaphorical and critical capacity, not as clinical or therapeutic advice. The intent of this text is not to defame or unlawfully harm any person or institution, but to raise issues of public concern, critique systemic inequities, and call for transparency, accountability, and justice.

Prologue

My head throbs. The ache is no longer a passing visitor—it is my constant companion. I have swallowed Saridon after Saridon, chasing relief that never lasts, only to find myself trapped in a cruel rebound headache. A splitting, crippling pain—woven with anxiety, with despair—that refuses to leave.

But the truth is, this headache is not merely chemical. It is historical. It is deeply political. It is the ache of betrayal.

I lost nearly everything—decades of savings earned with blood and sweat, gone in the blink of a bureaucratic eye. What did it all come to? The hurried enforcement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)—that Procrustean bed of policy where victims are mutilated into “haircuts” while crony corporates walk away with benefits. An Act that was supposed to safeguard the many, now hijacked to salvage the few.

And so I write. I write not with arms, but with words. Not in violence, but in dissent. My keyboard becomes my weapon in this non-violent warfare. Out of my suffering, out of the pressure of my splitting skull, a letter was born—a plea, a protest, a parable of pain. A letter that wields Saridon itself as metaphor: the quick-fix analgesic, banned elsewhere yet glorified here, mirroring the IBC’s hollow remedies—temporary relief for the powerful, chronic agony for the powerless.

Yes, my head aches. But the greater ache is that of injustice. And until true justice relieves this nation’s pain, I will continue to write.

To:

Mr. Paramavaiṣṇava Ajay Piramal CBE
Chairman, Piramal Group
Mumbai, India

Subject: The Headache of Injustice

“लाभनम् श्रेयः आरोग्यम्“

“Among all profits, cure is the highest good.” (Mahābhārata, Vana Parva)

Dear Mr. Piramal,

I write to you not merely as an individual, but as one among thousands of citizens whose trust, livelihoods, and futures were disrupted by systemic inequities in India’s corporate and legal landscape. This letter addresses both the tangible and metaphorical headaches caused by decisions favouring the powerful, as exemplified by the DHFL corporate manoeuvres and the regulatory treatment of Saridon.

Each day brings a headache—not the mild, fleeting kind, but a persistent ache born of betrayal, loss, and the societal rot that allows corporate takeovers to proceed largely unchallenged. In this sense, your product Saridon—consisting of Paracetamol, Propyphenazone, and Caffeine—is more than medicine; it is a metaphor for the world you inhabit and shape. Its “triple action” promises relief: a quick fix for pain, a stimulant to shake off lethargy, and a chemical assurance of control. And yet, much like its hidden dangers, the system around DHFL carries the promise of security while inflicting prolonged suffering.

• Paracetamol symbolizes immediate relief offered by “legal” (or even quasi-legal) legitimacy. On the surface, it soothes: regulatory approvals, court-sanctioned takeovers, the glossy assurance of compliance. Yet, like the drug’s hidden risk of liver toxicity, these legal structures conceal the long-term damage endured by ordinary citizens—the financial indigestion of dreams deferred, of homes lost, of trust betrayed.
• Propyphenazone represents structural power acting beneath the surface. Just as it adds analgesic potency but carries rare, fatal risks, your reported/alleged corporate interventions strengthen financial control yet potentially expose society to systemic hazards: predatory consolidations, opaque transactions, and subtle undermining of fairness. What is legal is not always ethical, and what is sanctioned is not always safe.
• Caffeine embodies the stimulation of perception, the intoxicating speed of profit, and the restless energy of crony networks. It can awaken and alert in your branding of “conscious capitalism,” but overstimulation causes anxiety, palpitations, and insomnia—the very conditions ordinary citizens experience as economic precarity and political disempowerment. Combined with the other two “ingredients,” it accelerates suffering in ways not immediately visible, creating cycles of acute and chronic distress.

Saridon is approved in India, accessible, and marketed as an over-the-counter solution, but officially banned worldwide. So too are the financial instruments and corporate strategies now under your control: they appear legitimate yet are restricted or disapproved elsewhere under international law as financial abuse. International pharmacopeias avoid endorsing propyphenazone-containing analgesics precisely because of these hidden dangers.

This is not an isolated issue. India remains a marketplace for drugs banned or restricted elsewhere—Nimesulide (liver toxicity), Metamizole/Analgin (blood disorders), Phenylpropanolamine (stroke risk), Cisapride (fatal arrhythmias), Furazolidone (carcinogenicity), and even Saridon. In September 2018, the Government of India banned 328 fixed-dose combinations, citing lack of therapeutic justification and safety concerns; Saridon (Paracetamol + Propyphenazone + Caffeine) was included. Yet within days, you challenged the order, and the Supreme Court granted a stay, allowing continued manufacture and sale pending further review. This legal limbo exemplifies a deeper malaise: medicines questioned internationally for safety are not only available over the counter (OTC) in India but are aggressively marketed with glossy advertisements.

Advertising itself becomes another metaphor: Saridon is freely promoted on Indian television—a space where most countries strictly prohibit pharmaceutical advertising. The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 exists, but loopholes and weak enforcement allow corporations to glamourize consumption while downplaying risks.

Is this ethically defensible in a nation already burdened by irrational self-medication, fragile healthcare literacy, and chronic regulatory opacity? How do certain companies repeatedly secure exemptions for drugs banned or restricted elsewhere? Is it merely coincidence—or does proximity to political power (through alleged electoral bond or PM CARES “donations”, or alleged Flashnet scam involvement), particularly under the present ruling establishment headed by the BJP, make some actors like you “more equal than others”? 

Rumour has it—allegedly—“better drugs” even sail in via Mundra Port, as if there were an Adani–Ambani–Piramal aisle in India’s corporate pharmacy. The pattern of quick judicial reprieves and regulatory indulgence therefore is not an exception; it is a recurring symptom of how commerce, law, and politics intersect in India’s current politico-economic landscape.

Here is an inter-section that follows:

Date	Event	Inference / Disparity Noted	Contrast with Common Citizens
Sept 2018	Govt bans 328 FDCs, including Saridon	Ban intended to protect public health	Safer drugs abroad face strict bans; Indian citizens left exposed
Sept 2018 (same month)	Supreme Court stays Saridon ban after Piramal challenge	Swift judicial indulgence ensures continued OTC sales	Public interest litigations often stuck in registry; common citizens’ cases languish
19 May 2021	NCLT orders reconsideration of Wadhawan’s 100% offer	Legally binding directive allegedly ignored	Common litigants wait years for enforcement of basic orders
25 May 2021	NCLAT stays NCLT’s order within 6 days	Unprecedented judicial speed—reflecting corporate privilege	Over 52 million cases pending; 173,000+ stuck for 30+ years
7 June 2021	NCLT approves Piramal’s plan ignoring earlier directive	Earlier order bypassed, undermining IBC’s maximization principle	Undertrials denied procedural fairness; years in jail without trial
27 Jan 2022	NCLAT finds DHFL resolution plan and process contrary to law	CoC conduct deemed illegal; process credibility in question	Citizens wait decades for such findings; depositors’ recourse slow and erratic
1 Mar 2022	Supreme Court stays NCLAT order in < 5 weeks	Lightning relief for Piramal; apex court bandwidth seemingly available on demand	76% of Indian prisoners are undertrials, many jailed 2–5 years without first hearing
2022–2025	Multiple depositors’ cases delayed, dismissed, or redirected on technicalities	Victim-citizens face procedural wrangling and forum shopping	Even SC registry rejections routinely happen for public interest cases, while corporate appeals sail through swiftly

All the favourable verdicts you have obtained from the apex court suggest a recurring pattern, resembling a VIP pass to the “inner circles” where the boundaries between the judiciary and the BJP-headed executive blur into obscurity. Each ruling seems to carry a weight of historical significance akin to the Ram Temple–Babri Masjid judgment—albeit, notably, without the ceremonial signature present in the latter. Recently, I have been divinely advised (apparently through a celestial memorandum relayed by Lord Rama, with His blessing discreetly transmitted to Mr. Chandrachud) by Aśvinidvaya to refrain from consuming your pharmaceutical products.

Moreover, Mr. Piramal, while your advertized promotion of Saridon⤡ ⤡ and related products may operate within India’s bounds, still it is worth asking: are you doing the right thing by advertising such medicine? In many advanced jurisdictions, pharmaceutical advertising to lay consumers is tightly constrained——life-saving medicines (e.g., Sorbitrate for angina, Digoxin for heart failure, Warfarin for clot prevention, Insulin for diabetes, Streptokinase for heart attack, or Amphotericin-B for fungal infections) are seldom, if ever, directly marketed to the public. This restraint exists because of the risk of overpromising, misleading impressions, and encouraging inappropriate use. Recently, the U.S. FDA announced a crackdown⤡ on deceptive drug advertising, warning companies to remove misleading claims and closing loopholes that allow “magic drug” narratives that omit safety risks.

When a consumer sees an ad promising near-miraculous relief—whether it is Saridon, Anacin, Crocin, Disprin, Revital, or I-Pill—what they encounter is the construction of a magic “placebo” drug myth: quick fixes presented as certainty, with side effects and contraindications obscured. In your case, promoting an OTC analgesic that uses propyphenazone (restricted internationally) or advertising Here we approach what Illich once called “medical nemesis”: the condition where medicine itself becomes a source of harm, not only through iatrogenic risks but by fostering parasitic over-dependency, disempowering people from making reasoned health choices, and masking social pain with chemical fixes.

If your intention is public health, your advertising should reflect it: full disclosure, balanced risk–benefit communication, and restraint—especially in a regulatory environment weaker than global benchmarks. Otherwise, you risk being remembered not as a healer but as a seller of “magic,” offering instant relief while leaving society to bear the hidden costs.

We seek no Saridon—shunned by the world, yet heralded in India through dubious ad-display by your pharma-empire. We ask for accountability. We ask for relief that is real, lasting, and just. We ask for recognition that economic violence, like chemical overstimulation, leaves scars far deeper than what is immediately visible. In a society where governance favours the few and markets prey on the many, our collective body—the public—aches under the weight of inequity, while the powerful consume the short-term fix and move on. It is no wonder that India’s rank in the World Happiness Report 2025 is 118th out of 147 countries!

Your alleged operations, and the regulatory frameworks that enable them, reportedly reflect a troubling alignment between corporate ambition and political favour. The consolidation of financial assets through legal loopholes, seemingly court-sanctioned manoeuvres, and (reportedly) strategic alliances with government actors has created an environment where the law protects the powerful at the expense of ordinary citizens. In this context, Saridon’s metaphor is stark: the immediate relief of the few comes at the enduring pain of the many.

As you consider your role in this systemic framework, let Saridon serve not merely as a product on the shelf but as an allegory: the promise of quick relief, the seduction of immediate gratification, and the necessity of vigilance against hidden toxicity. There is no triple action for the heartache wrought by financial and systemic injustice, yet acknowledgment is the first step toward remedy. Let the world’s Paracetamol, Propyphenazone, and Caffeine—your authority, resources, and influence—be exercised with foresight, restraint, and moral (“conscious-conscience”) responsibility, so that the collective headache of the financially victimized people may finally ease.

I hope you understand this letter not as mere complaint, but as an earnest appeal from those whose trust and livelihood have been compromised. Our headaches are real, our grievances justified, and our patience nearing its limits. Let the metaphor of Saridon remind us that every short-term fix carries long-term consequences, and that genuine healing requires more than legality—it requires long-term justice.

Therefore, Mr. Piramal, beyond metaphors and grievances, I ask for something concrete: a transparent dialogue with DHFL victims, the establishment of an independent redressal mechanism for those financially wronged, and a public commitment to align your pharmaceutical and financial practices with global standards of safety and accountability. I also urge you—for the sake of global prudence and to avoid entanglement with international pharma-lobbies—to withdraw Saridon from the Indian market, a medicine that is banned worldwide. Such steps, however modest, would signal not just power exercised, but responsibility embraced.

नमस्ते अस्तु मा मा हिंसीः

लड़ेंगे या मरेंगे!  

इंक़लाब ज़िंदाबाद!  

Hypothetically Yours,

Debeprasad (sic) Sadhan (patriarchal insertion?!) Bandopadhyay (sic)
A DHFL Victim & Concerned Citizen of Contemporary India

COPY TO:

1. The Hon’ble Director General, World Health Organization (WHO) 

2. Shri A.H. Laddhad, The Hon’ble Prothonotary and Senior Master, Bombay High Court (Case No. S/42/2025)