Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 10-09-2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: petitioner 3S AND OUR HEALTH SOCIETY; respondents Union of India & others.
  • Nature of proceeding: Miscellaneous application (No.1177/2025) in W.P.(C) No.437/2024 seeking mandatory front‑of‑pack labeling (FoPL) and nutritional literacy measures.
  • Background: The petitioner highlighted acute risk of unhealthy eating behaviours among school‑age children, citing UNICEF Child Nutrition Report 2025 which shows overweight prevalence rising from 2% to 10% for ages 5‑19 between 2000‑2022 and notes that while ~80% of food inside schools is freshly cooked, ~80% of food available near schools is packaged snacks.
  • Court observations: The Court reiterated concerns about children’s exposure to packaged foods, the need for nutritional literacy, and the importance of clear labeling.

Directions Issued

1. The Court directed the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to respond specifically to the petitioner’s suggestion that the final FoPL regime be made mandatory from the outset, or to indicate a reasonable period after which mandatory compliance will commence.

2. The Court asked the Union of India to explain how schools will incorporate nutritional literacy—through curriculum, initiatives, workshops—covering interpretation of packaged‑food information and FoPL.

3. The Court listed thirteen detailed questions for the FSSAI, covering:

  • Reasonable fixed timeline for implementing the two proposed phases.
  • Basis for inclusion criteria of products high in two or more nutrients‑of‑concern (Phase I) versus any one nutrient‑of‑concern (Phase II).
  • Methodology to identify specific sweetened beverages in Phase I and the threshold levels for the concerned nutrients.
  • Whether threshold calculations will differentiate between food categories 2 and 3, and between food groups B (moderately processed) and C (excessively processed).
  • Whether Fat and Sugar thresholds will be based on ‘Total’ Sugar and ‘Saturated Fat’, and how trans‑fat will be factored.
  • Consideration of colour perception (red associated with non‑veg) in the FoPL design.
  • Specifications for the proposed ‘red hexagon’ (dimensions, standardisation, proportional sizing, font size, placement).
  • Approach to cater to varied literacy levels without distinct pictorial representations for each nutrient‑of‑concern.
  • Rationale for using a combined/composite hexagon for multiple nutrients‑of‑concern instead of separate symbols.
  • Regulation of potential increase in artificial preservatives, emulsifiers, etc., resulting from FoPL implementation.
  • Whether a voluntary compliance period will be allowed after final regulations become mandatory, and its duration.
  • How the Union proposes to embed nutritional‑literacy education at school level.

4. The FSSAI must file its response by affidavit within 10 days of the order date.

5. The response shall be shared with the petitioner, who may file a reply before the next hearing.

6. The matter is listed for a further hearing on 28‑09‑2026 and will be placed on top of the Board.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court issued a reportable order directing the FSSAI to provide a detailed affidavit answering the thirteen questions within ten days and scheduled the next hearing for 28 September 2026, thereby advancing the regulatory discussion on mandatory FoPL and school‑level nutritional literacy.

Topics: Food Labeling, Child Nutrition