The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre to act on the implementation of front-of-pack warning labels for packaged foods containing high levels of sugar, salt and saturated fats. The bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran expressed strong displeasure over the government and Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) position on the issue. The court questioned whether corporate pressure was influencing the government’s approach, stressing that public health, particularly the health of children, should remain the priority. “The matter concerns the health of citizens – particularly growing children – and decisions regarding it should not be influenced by corporate pressure,” the court said. he observations came during a hearing of a Public Interest Litigation challenging the delay in implementing warning labels. The petitioner’s counsel referred to minutes of an FSSAI meeting held on March 7 and argued that the decisions taken there were inconsistent with earlier court directions. FSSAI has pointed to opposition from the food industry and proposed a tabular format showing recommended daily intake of added sugar, salt and saturated fats instead.
Court stresses consumers’ right to know
The Centre argued that applying international standards directly could create difficulties for traditional Indian foods, including products such as namkeen, which could receive warning marks. The government also submitted that food products in developed countries generally contain lower levels of sugar, salt and fat. The court rejected this reasoning and questioned whether India should avoid stronger health standards because of such differences. It emphasised that warning labels are intended to provide information rather than prevent the sale of products. The bench said manufacturers may oppose the system because of potential business implications, but consumers should be given sufficient information to make their own purchasing decisions. The Supreme Court granted the Centre two weeks to comply with the proposed labelling directions and warned that it would take a final decision at the next hearing if the government failed to act.
