Court Clears Gambhir and Foundation
The Delhi High Court on Friday, November 21, 2025, quashed criminal proceedings against Gautam Gambhir, his foundation, and family members in a case related to alleged irregularities in the distribution of Covid-19 drugs during the second wave of the pandemic in 2021. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna pronounced the order, stating, 'criminal complaint quashed'.
The ruling provides significant relief to the former BJP MP and current Indian cricket team head coach, who, along with the Gautam Gambhir Foundation (GGF), his wife Natasha Gambhir, mother Seema Gambhir, and GGF CEO Aparajita Singh, had been accused of unlicensed stocking and distribution of medicines like Fabiflu and medical oxygen.
Allegations and Legal Proceedings
The case originated from a complaint filed by the Delhi government's Drugs Control Department in July 2021. The complaint alleged violations under Section 18(c) read with Section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, which prohibits the manufacture, sale, and distribution of drugs without a valid license.
The legal journey saw several developments:
- In September 2021, the Delhi High Court had initially stayed the trial court proceedings.
- This stay was later vacated in April 2025, prompting Gambhir and his co-accused to file a fresh application seeking to recall the order.
- The High Court reserved its verdict in August 2025 before delivering the final judgment on November 21, 2025.
Court's Rationale
In its decision, the High Court found no evidence of illegal sale or misuse of the drugs. It highlighted that the medicines were procured from legal vendors and distributed free of cost to those in need during a severe public health crisis. The court emphasized that the actions of the Gautam Gambhir Foundation were charitable and aimed at saving lives.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna's ruling also noted that allowing prosecution in such circumstances would have a 'chilling effect' by discouraging individuals and organizations from offering aid during public emergencies. The court concluded that there had been no violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, effectively exonerating Gambhir, his family, and the foundation from criminal liability.
7 Comments
Stan Marsh
It's good that Gambhir was cleared of criminal charges, especially given the desperate times. Yet, the case does highlight the potential for unregulated activities, even well-meaning ones, to complicate public health efforts.
Eric Cartman
The court's point about a 'chilling effect' is understandable, as we need people to step up in emergencies. However, maintaining some level of oversight, even for good intentions, is crucial for public trust.
Kyle Broflovski
Quashed doesn't mean innocent. The optics are still bad.
Stan Marsh
Exactly right. Punishing aid would have a chilling effect.
Eric Cartman
While it's important to encourage charitable acts during crises, the legal framework for drug distribution exists to protect public health. This decision balances both, but the initial concerns were valid.
ZmeeLove
Great news! Charity shouldn't be criminalized, especially during a pandemic.
BuggaBoom
Unlicensed distribution is a serious matter. This decision feels wrong.