Industry Odisha Bureau, Sep 28: The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on FSSAI’s front-of-pack labelling rules. Warnings would flag excess sugar, fat and salt. How sugar and fat are measured, and when rules apply, remain contested.
India’s packaged food labels face two unresolved questions. What counts as too much sugar or fat? And how quickly should companies be made to warn buyers? Both now await the Supreme Court.
On Monday, the SC reserved its verdict on FSSAI’s proposed front-of-pack labelling rules. The bench gave all parties three days to file final written submissions. The framework covers packaged foods and beverages.
What shoppers could see
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India has proposed prominent warnings. They would flag products exceeding prescribed thresholds for added sugar, fat and salt.
FSSAI’s proposed format resembles one adopted by Canada. A red hexagon on a white square would name the nutrients of concern. The warning would sit on the top left of the pack’s front. Its font would be at least one point larger than the back-panel nutrition table.
The threshold question
The sharpest technical dispute concerns how sugar and fat are measured. Counsel for an NGO argued thresholds should use total sugar and total fat. The proposal, by contrast, targets added sugar.
The difference matters. Added sugar counts only sugar put in by manufacturers. Total sugar would also capture sugars naturally present in ingredients. The choice could change which products carry a warning.
FSSAI argued that consumers must be told about added sugar. The NGO’s counsel also said FSSAI’s consultation process could continue.
A timeline in question
FSSAI wants the rules introduced in a single phase. Companies would get one year to comply once regulations are finalised. In a compliance affidavit, the regulator said finalising draft rules needs about four months.
The bench pushed back. Justice Pardiwala called FSSAI’s timeline unreasonable. He said the court would decide the timeline itself. The court also asked why the process should take so long, citing public health.
The ultra-processed gap
A separate gap drew the bench’s attention. There is currently no clear definition of ultra-processed food. The court said greater clarity on that definition was needed.
That question sits apart from the nutrient thresholds. Yet it shows how much technical groundwork remains unfinished.
Packs already printed
For manufacturers, timing carries real commercial weight. Some food companies may already hold packaging printed in bulk. FSSAI said the one-year window would ease that commercial hardship. The bench asked counsel for food manufacturers to cooperate with the process.
The court also said its eventual order would bind FSSAI. The regulator would need to implement those directions.
Awaiting the judgment
For now, the labelling rules remain a proposal. No final verdict has been delivered. Once final submissions are in, the judgment could shape three things. These are warning thresholds, label design and implementation timing. How India measures sugar and fat on its packs remains undecided.
