In a stern rebuke, the Supreme Court issued a two-week ultimatum to the Union Government and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) over the delay in implementing mandatory front-of-pack warning labels (FOPL) for packaged foods containing high levels of sugar, salt, and saturated fat.
Expressing strong displeasure over the government’s hesitation, a bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran asked whether the authorities were yielding to corporate lobbying at the expense of public health.
“The matter concerns the health of citizens — particularly growing children — and decisions regarding it should not be influenced by corporate pressure,” the bench observed during the hearing. “Will the government do it itself, or will we have to issue an order? If you can’t do it, we will.”
FSSAI Pulled Up Over Corporate Influence and Diluted Rules
The apex court’s warning came during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) advocating for clear, interpretive front-of-pack warning marks on ultra-processed and packaged foods.
The petitioner highlighted that the FSSAI’s meeting minutes from March 7 directly contradicted earlier judicial expectations. Instead of introducing eye-catching red warning badges or health alerts, the FSSAI suggested a basic tabular declaration listing daily recommended nutritional values. The petitioner pointed out that the food regulator’s affidavit selectively highlighted food industry opposition. However, it ignored mounting evidence presented by public health advocates.
Addressing Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Brijender Chahar, the bench questioned why the administration appeared unwilling to enforce decisive action. This reluctance came despite clear court observations.
Court Rejects ‘Traditional Food’ Defense
Representing the Centre, the ASG argued that strict international packaging standards cannot easily apply to traditional Indian snacks like namkeen. These foods naturally carry higher salt and fat content. As a result, strict rules might tag numerous local items with prominent red warnings.
The bench firmly dismissed this argument, asking whether the government believed India should fall behind global consumer safety standards.
Key observations made by the court included:
- Consumer Right to Know: Warning labels are meant to inform consumers rather than stop product sales. The final buying decision remains with the citizen.
- Secondary Role of Manufacturers: Commercial interests of food corporations cannot dictate decisions surrounding public health policies.
- Child Health Priority: Clear, instant visual cues are vital to protect children from lifestyle diseases like diabetes and early-onset hypertension caused by excessive sugar and salt intake.
Two-Week Final Window Before Judicial Directives
Granting a final two-week window for the Union Government to file its compliance response, the bench warned that if the regulator fails to present a concrete framework for front-of-pack warning labels, the court will proceed to pronounce its own binding verdict.
Curated news reports, in-depth analysis, and special features by India’s Opinion editorial team.
