In a landmark order, the Supreme Court of India has issued a comprehensive and unambiguous directive to the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to implement front-of-pack warning labels on junk food within two weeks. The bench, led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala, rejected FSSAI’s argument that India cannot match international standards, asking pointedly: “Should India remain an underdeveloped country?” The Court further stated: “The world should know that India is very much concerned about the overall health of its citizens, more particularly the growing children.”
The Court framed the issue as a matter of constitutional right to health under Article 21, stating that the right to life encompasses the right to health. It also invoked Article 47, which casts a duty on the State to improve public health as its primary duty. Among the key directives, FSSAI has been granted two weeks to place its final decision on record. The Court explicitly rejected the stance that India cannot match international standards and cited examples from Chile, Israel, and Canada, where warning labels have been successfully implemented. It quoted the Economic Survey 2025-26, which recommended warning labels over the Indian Nutrition Rating (INR) system, and emphasised the impact of unhealthy foods on children, citing UNICEF data on rising childhood obesity. The Court refused to hear counsel for the food industry, making it clear that public health cannot be held hostage to commercial interests.
Evidence cited by the Court included the Economic Survey 2025-26, which noted that India’s ultra-processed foods market increased more than 150% from 2009 to 2023, the same period in which obesity doubled in men and women, and the UNICEF Child Nutrition Report 2025, which showed that overweight school-age children increased from 2% to 10% between 2000 and 2022. International models referenced included Chile’s phase-wise implementation and Canada’s front-of-package nutrition symbols. The Court’s order leaves no room for delay. The Authority must adopt warning labels (not the INR star system) as recommended by the Economic Survey and supported by global evidence, define thresholds for sugar, salt, and saturated fat based on a nutrient profile model, and place its final decision on record within two weeks.
Dr. Arun Gupta, Convenor of Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest (NAPi), said: “The Supreme Court has left nothing to chance. It has quoted the Economic Survey, cited international examples, and framed this as a constitutional right to health. FSSAI has no more excuses. The path is clear: warning labels on junk food, within two weeks. This is a historic victory for the health of India’s children.”
NAPi has sent a proposal to FSSAI inspired by the order (Point 15) and requested FSSAI not to begin a new process and suggested solutions for this.
Comments