SpaceX's Mega IPO: A Market Gamechanger?
07 Apr 2026
Biocon chairperson Kiran Mazumdar‑Shaw has said India is still falling short where it matters most for the next wave of science‑led growth — creating capital‑market rules that allow innovation to flourish.
The country’s IPO and listing norms are incompatible with biotechnology innovation, with companies spending 10 years or more in research and clinical trials before earning their first rupee of revenue.
Speaking to media at company's headquarters in Benguluru on April 6, Mazumdar‑Shaw said, “We don’t have listing norms that allow companies to list as pre‑revenue or even pre‑clinical companies.”
“In the US, you can do all this. In India, SEBI requires three years of revenue track-record. How does a clinical‑stage biotech ever meet that?”
The regulatory gap has a cascading impact on the entire innovation ecosystem — from venture capital availability to talent retention — and explains why some of India’s most valuable biotech innovation ends up being monetised abroad, she said.
Why Biocon spun off Bicara in the US?
Mazumdar‑Shaw cited her experience of Bicara Therapeutics, a Boston‑based oncology company spun off from Biocon’s in‑house research.
“All the R&D happened in India but we decided to create the company in the US because India does not value innovation the way the US does,” she said.
Bicara, which focuses on a bispecific antibody for cancer, went public in the US two years ago and is now valued at over $1 billion, despite still being a clinical‑stage company. Its lead asset is in pivotal studies and could enter the market within the next two to three years, she said.
“The reason it is valued where it is, is because the data looks so good,” Mazumdar‑Shaw said. US capital markets are designed to price scientific promise — not just current revenues, she said, adding India’s long gestation periods deter investors. “VCs need an exit route,” she said. “If there’s no listing pathway, why would they stay invested for 10–12 years?”
Bicara Therapeutics, founded in 2020, focuses on first-in-class bifunctional antibodies for cancer. Before its $362-million Nasdaq IPO on September 13, 2024, it raised over $353 million privately. Its lead product is ficerafusp alfa (BCA101), targeting EGFR/TGF-β. Biocon's holding dropped below 20% post-2023 funding. As of early 2026, BCA101 is in advanced clinical development Phase 1/1b and moving toward Phase 2/3.
No dearth of innovation, India lacks ecosystem
Mazumdar‑Shaw rejected the claim that India lacks innovation. She pointed to Biocon’s track record in biosimilars and insulins and to other Indian companies building cutting‑edge platforms in cell therapy, biologics and peptides.
“There is no dearth of innovation in India,” she said. “What we lack is the ecosystem.”
Risk capital willing to back long‑cycle science, a regulatory framework that keeps pace with new technologies and capital‑market rules that allow early‑stage biotech companies to list, are three missing pillars for the innovation ecosystem.
Without these, India risks remaining a manufacturing and services hub rather than an innovation powerhouse, she said.
“If we can create this ecosystem, innovation itself can become a $100‑billion valuation opportunity in the next few years,” Mazumdar‑Shaw said.
While welcoming government schemes such as R&D incentives, production‑linked incentive (PLI) and Rs 10,000 crore Bioshakti programmes, she cautioned against spreading support too thinly.
“Support cannot be like confetti,” she said. “You have to build scale.” Strategic prioritisation, focusing on areas where India can lead globally, is essential to converting public funding into commercial success.
She also urged regulators and policymakers to understand that biopharma innovation does not follow the same timelines as IT or consumer tech. “This is not a delivery app,” she said. “The lab‑to‑market journey is long.”
“If India wants innovation‑led companies,” Mazumdar‑Shaw said, “it has to create systems that allow them to be born, survive and scale — here".
