Policy expert warns: Unregulated seed chemicals threaten food safety, soil health

By A Representative 

In a detailed representation submitted to the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee (CIB&RC) on June 25, 2026, public policy expert Dr. Donthi Narasimha Reddy has urgently drawn the attention of the regulatory authorities to what he describes as a critical regulatory vacuum governing pesticide‑coated seeds and seed processing units across India. 

The letter warns that the absence of mandatory labelling norms for pesticide‑treated seeds, combined with the near‑total lack of oversight of hazardous chemicals used in seed processing facilities, poses serious and continuing risks to public health, environmental safety, and the integrity of the country's food and agricultural systems.

Dr. Reddy points out that Indian farmers, agricultural workers, and consumers currently have no means of knowing which seeds have been chemically treated, with what compounds, at what concentrations, or what precautions are required for their safe handling. He notes that decades ago, people in India died after accidentally consuming pesticide‑coated seeds that were visually indistinguishable from food grain, and that the conditions which produced those fatalities—absence of labelling, absence of awareness, and absence of any regulatory requirement to disclose chemical treatment—have not been structurally remedied since. 

The letter further asserts that there has been no independent research on whether insecticide residues from seed coatings persist into edible plant parts, no assessment of the soil and ecological impacts of these treatments under Indian conditions, and no rigorous evaluation of the efficacy of the insecticides being used.

The representation also highlights the compounding hazards posed by seed processing units, which use concentrated sulphuric acid and other hazardous chemicals to process living seed material without any guidelines, standard operating procedures, or safety assessments having been issued by any legal authority. No records are maintained of which pesticides or chemicals are used, and effluents from seed processing are not tested for residual pesticide content. 

The consequences of this regulatory vacuum, Dr. Reddy states, are documented in a Joint Monitoring Report submitted to the National Green Tribunal (Southern Zone, Chennai) in January 2020, in the matter of O.A. No. 43 of 2019(SZ), arising from seed processing units in Jogulamba Gadwal District, Telangana. That report confirmed systematic illegal discharge of untreated acidic effluent, severe soil and groundwater contamination, and comprehensive non‑compliance at every one of the 23 units inspected. The letter characterises the Gadwal case not as a local anomaly but as a systemic failure of regulation.

Dr. Reddy has urged the Central Insecticides Board to take four immediate steps: issue mandatory labelling requirements for all pesticide‑coated seeds; bring pesticide seed coatings within the formal registration and safety assessment framework; issue guidelines and standard operating procedures for the use of chemicals in seed processing units; and mandate pesticide residue testing of seed processing effluents. The detailed basis for these recommendations is set out in an Advocacy Note enclosed as an annexure to the letter.

The representation comes at a time when India's pesticide regulatory framework is undergoing significant change. The Pesticides Management Bill, 2025, which aims to replace the Insecticides Act of 1968, proposes mandatory printing of QR codes or labels on seed packets to disclose seed health, expected performance, and producer certification, along with a centralised seed traceability portal. 

Meanwhile, the Insecticides (First Amendment) Rules, 2025, have introduced stricter labelling standards, including bilingual labels, QR codes, and enhanced safety disclosures. However, Dr. Reddy's letter suggests that these reforms may not adequately address the specific gaps relating to pesticide‑coated seeds and seed processing unit oversight.

Dr. Reddy has also copied his representation to the Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare. He has invoked the precautionary principle, arguing that India cannot continue to expose people, agricultural workers, farmers, soil ecosystems, and the food supply to unassessed chemical risks. He has respectfully requested acknowledgement of the representation and a response indicating what steps the Board proposes to take.