Archive · 14 Aug 2026
Supreme Court gives FSSAI last chance on warning labels
The Supreme Court is the highest court in India, like the head judge for the whole country.
It is upset with the FSSAI, the agency that checks the safety of the food we eat.
The court wants packets with lots of sugar, salt or fat to carry a big, clear warning on the front, like 'High in Sugar'.
The FSSAI instead proposed putting a small table of numbers on the package.
Many people, including children, find numbers and tables hard to understand.
The court thinks big food companies may be pressuring the FSSAI to avoid warning labels.
The government says strict warnings might make traditional Indian snacks like namkeen look unhealthy, and even eggs could get a red symbol.
The court says children's health matters more than business worries.
The government now has two weeks to decide what to do.
If it does not act, the court says it will make the rules itself.
The Supreme Court on Thursday sharply criticised the Centre and FSSAI for failing to introduce front-of-pack warning labels on packaged foods high in sugar, salt and saturated fat.
The Bench gave the government two weeks to place its final decision on record, warning: 'This is your last chance. Next time we will dictate the judgement.'
The Court questioned whether FSSAI was 'succumbing' to 'immense pressure' from corporate houses rather than protecting public health, especially for children.
FSSAI proposed a numerical or pictorial daily-limit table (25g added sugar, 10g saturated fat, 5g salt per 2024 ICMR guidelines), which petitioners rejected as less effective than clear warnings.
The government said international thresholds could put red labels on traditional Indian foods like namkeen and even eggs and harm small businesses; the Court said commercial interests cannot override public health.
- Who
- A Supreme Court Bench led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala (most reports name Justice K. Vinod Chandran; one report names Justice K.V. Viswanathan), the Central government and FSSAI, and petitioners 3S Health Society and Our Health Society.
- What
- A dispute over whether packaged foods high in sugar, salt and saturated fat should carry clear front-of-pack warning labels instead of numerical nutritional tables.
- When
- Thursday, August 13, 2026, following earlier Supreme Court directions from February 2026 and an April 2025 order to an FSSAI expert committee.
- Where
- Supreme Court of India, New Delhi.
- Why
- To protect public health, particularly of children, amid rising obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and to ensure consumers know what they are buying.
Public Health Advocates & Petitioners
Government, FSSAI & Food Manufacturers
Label format
Public Health Advocates & Petitioners
Clear front-of-pack warnings like 'High in Sugar' answer a simple question and are proven effective; a numerical table forces consumers, many with limited literacy and health literacy, to calculate and interpret the risk themselves.
Government, FSSAI & Food Manufacturers
A numerical or pictorial table gives consumers more information - amounts of added sugar, saturated fat and salt alongside recommended daily limits - and allows informed choices 'without creating fear amongst the consumers'.
Industry influence
Public Health Advocates & Petitioners
The Court and health groups say FSSAI is succumbing to pressure from corporate houses; minutes of a June 2021 FSSAI meeting reportedly show a U-turn on warning labels, and most industry bodies at a March 19, 2026 consultation opposed them.
Government, FSSAI & Food Manufacturers
The regulator says its proposal follows global practices such as the star-rating system designed to give simplified, easy-to-understand nutrition information; manufacturers argue strict warnings would unfairly hurt their business.
Applying international standards
Public Health Advocates & Petitioners
India should adopt warning systems already used internationally, as Chile did in 2016, given rapidly rising obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease; the Court asked whether India should 'remain as an undeveloped country'.
Government, FSSAI & Food Manufacturers
Thresholds developed for different dietary patterns could put red symbols on almost all traditional Indian foods, including namkeen and even eggs (two eggs contain 11g fat against a 10g daily limit), and affect the one-third of MSME revenue that comes from traditional food businesses.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Bench
- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran (one report names Justice K.V. Viswanathan)
- Regulator
- Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI)
- Deadline
- Two weeks for the Centre and FSSAI to place their final decision on record
- Court's warning
- "This is your last chance. Next time we will dictate the judgement."
- FSSAI proposal
- Numerical/pictorial table of daily limits: 25g added sugar, 10g saturated fat, 5g salt (2024 ICMR dietary guidelines)
- Petitioners
- 3S Health Society and Our Health Society
- Stakeholder consultation
- March 19, 2026 - a majority of industry organisations opposed warning labels
Sources
SC pulls up Centre, FSSAI over delay in front-of-pack warning labels on packaged foods
Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Warning Labels On Packaged Food, Questions Industry Pressure
"If You Can't, We Will": Top Court Ultimatum To Centre On Food Item Labelling
‘Taking us for a toss?’: Top court raps food regulator on warning labels
If you can't do it, we will
'You don't want people to remain healthy?': Supreme Court warns FSSAI over food warning labels
'Do You Not Want People Healthy?' SC Slams Centre Over Delay In Front-Pack Warning Labels For Unhealthy Foods
