Concerned about health of children: Supreme Court seeks warnings on junk food packs

The Supreme Court asked stakeholders to consider front-of-pack warning labels for packaged foods high in salt, sugar and fat. The move could shape clearer consumer alerts and curb unhealthy choices among children.

In Short

• Supreme Court says it's concerned about health of children, urges food safety focus
• FSSAI proposes red hexagonal labels indicating high fat, sugar, salt or sweetened beverages
• SC to issue detailed order on front-of-pack warning labels for high salt, sugar, fat foods

The Supreme Court on Thursday said it is concerned about the health of people, especially growing children, and asked all those involved in food safety to consider, in the national interest, the issue of front-of-pack warning labels on packaged products high in salt, sugar and fat.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran said it would pass a detailed order on the “serious matter” and seek information from stakeholders. “We are only concerned about the health of people, especially growing children. We want all the concerned to consider the cause in national interest,” the bench said.

The court said it had also done some homework on the issue, asked the parties to study the order once uploaded, and posted the matter for hearing on September 28.

During a brief hearing on a plea filed by public charitable trust 3S and Our Health Society, the bench asked the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India whether it had framed any guideline to show, on the front of a packet, when the food content crosses the limit for sugar, salt or fat.

The court noted that details about packaged food contents are usually printed on the rear side of packets.

Appearing for the FSSAI, senior advocate Maninder Singh said international practice requires two disclosures on the rear side of packets: the quantity per 100 grams and the quantity per serving.

Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for an intervenor, said the government was putting “Kurkure” on the same pedestal as other nutritional food such as eggs and salted cashew. He said ultra-processed food should carry a stronger warning.

“Red is for non-vegetarian and green is for vegetarian. So instead of red if some other colour can be used for a warning label in case of ultra processed food items,” he submitted. The bench took his suggestions on record and said its order would be uploaded in a day or two.

In an earlier affidavit filed in the case, the FSSAI told the court that it has proposed a prominent front-of-pack warning label in a red-coloured hexagonal shape for food products high in added saturated fat, added sugar and salt. It said the proposal is meant to give consumers a simple, prominent and easily understandable warning about such products.

According to the affidavit, the warning would apply in the first phase to food products high in any two or more of these nutrients, and to specified sweetened beverages, on the basis of thresholds set out in the Dietary Guidelines for Indians, 2024 issued by ICMR-NIN.

The label would carry declarations such as “High Fat”, “High Sugar”, “High Salt” or “Highly Sweetened Beverage”, as applicable. The FSSAI also said the front-of-pack nutrition labelling system would be brought in phases so that consumers can adapt and industry gets time for reformulation. In phase II, the warning would extend to products high in any one of these nutrients.

The affidavit was filed in compliance with the apex court’s August 13 order on the plea by the trust, represented by advocate Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, which has sought directions to the Centre, states and Union territories to make front-of-package warning labels mandatory on packaged foods.

On August 13, the court had asked whether India should remain an underdeveloped country and said it did not approve of the Centre’s stand that it was not possible to match international standards, particularly those of developed countries.

The court said front-of-package labelling was needed to help consumers make informed buying choices and healthier dietary decisions, especially as growing children were increasingly getting addicted to junk food.

It had also pulled up the FSSAI for the delay in introducing warning labels, noting that obesity has been recognised as a public health challenge in India, and asked the Centre to consult experts and decide on the visual appearance of the labels, including colours, words, numbers, letters, symbols and percentage information.

“If the Union does it on its own, well and good. Otherwise, we shall proceed to pass further directions,” the bench had said.

The matter will now be taken up again on September 28 as the court examines the proposed warning label system for packaged foods.

- Ends