Food Safety and Standards in India: Legal Framework

and Provisions
Constitutional Relevance
The Directive Principles of State Policy under Part IV of
the Indian Constitution mandate the Indian government, at
both central and state levels, to protect public health, with
special emphasis on women and child welfare.
Historical Background: Food Laws in India
Before 1954, food safety was regulated by state-specific laws,
making uniform implementation difficult. The Indian Penal
Code (IPC) initially addressed food safety through Sections
272 and 273, which made food adulteration punishable with
imprisonment and fines. However, the IPC dealt only with
cases where food was rendered noxious. To address the
broader issue of food adulteration, the central government
enacted the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PFA),
1954.
The PFA aimed to prevent ill-health due to adulteration,
safeguard the nutritional standards of food, and regulate food
production. It was amended in 1964, 1976, and 1986.
Eventually, the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA),
2006 replaced the PFA and consolidated all existing laws
related to food safety.
Current Food Safety Laws
1. Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
The primary law governing food safety in India. It
integrates all prior food-related laws to ensure the
availability of safe and wholesome food for human
consumption.
2. Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and
Registration of Food Businesses) Regulation, 2011
Regulates the licensing and registration of food
businesses.
3. Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labeling)
Regulation, 2011
Prescribes labeling and packaging standards for food
products.
 4. Food Safety and Standards (Laboratory and
Sampling Analysis) Regulation, 2011
Governs the procedures for food sample testing.
5. Food Safety and Standards (Food Product Standards
and Food Additives) Regulation, 2011
Regulates food standards and additives permissible in
food items.
Definition of Food (Section 3(j))
The term "food" encompasses any substance intended for
human consumption, whether processed, partially processed,
or unprocessed. This includes genetically modified foods,
infant food, packaged drinking water, and alcoholic drinks.
However, it excludes animal feed, live animals (unless
processed for human consumption), and drugs, among others.
What is Food Adulteration?
According to Section 3(a) of the FSSA, an adulterant is any
material that can make food unsafe, substandard, or
misbranded. Food adulteration involves adding substances to
food that lower its quality or contaminate it, leading to health
risks.
Common Methods of Adulteration
• Use of chemicals for faster ripening of fruits.

• Mixing of decomposed fruits and vegetables with fresh

ones.
• Adding artificial colors or chemical dyes to attract

consumers.
• Adding pebbles, stones, and other impurities to grains and

pulses.
• Mixing cheaper substances to increase the weight of food

products.
Purpose of the FSSA
The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 consolidates all
laws related to food safety and creates the Food Safety and
Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to regulate the
manufacture, storage, distribution, sale, and import of food
items.
Authorities Established Under FSSA
1. Food Safety and Standards Authority of India
(FSSAI)
Established under Section 4, FSSAI is the apex authority
responsible for regulating food safety standards. Its
 headquarters are in New Delhi, with regional offices in
cities like Guwahati, Mumbai, Kolkata, Cochin,
Chennai, and Delhi. FSSAI consists of a Chairperson
and 22 members, one-third of whom must be women.
2. Central Advisory Committee
Ensures cooperation between FSSAI and enforcement
agencies.
3. Scientific Panels and Committees
These bodies advise FSSAI on various issues, ensuring a
science-based approach to food safety.
4. State-Level Authorities
State governments appoint a Commissioner of Food
Safety and Food Safety Officers to implement the
provisions of the Act at the state level.
Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses (Section 31)
Operating a food business without a license is prohibited. The
Designated Officer has the authority to grant or reject
licenses based on public health and safety. The rejection of a
license must be preceded by a hearing and valid reasons.
Certain small-scale food businesses, such as petty
manufacturers or vendors, are exempt from licensing but must
register with the appropriate authority.
Offences and Penalties
Section 48 of the FSSA lays out various offences related to
food adulteration, including:
• Selling substandard food – Penalty up to ₹5 lakh.

• Selling misbranded food – Penalty up to ₹3 lakh.

• Misleading advertisements – Penalty up to ₹10 lakh.

• Extraneous material in food – Penalty up to ₹1 lakh.

• Unhygienic conditions – Penalty up to ₹1 lakh.

Punishments for Non-Compliance

The FSSA provides for imprisonment and fines for violations
such as manufacturing or selling unsafe food, obstructing food
safety officers, or providing false information. Repeat
offenders face increased penalties.
Appeals and Adjudication (Chapter 10)
Under Section 76, appeals against decisions of the Special
Court can be made to the High Court within 45 days. High
Court benches of at least two judges handle such appeals.
Functions of FSSAI
1. Setting Rules and Guidelines
 FSSAI establishes hygiene and safety standards for food
manufacturing.
2. Granting Licenses
All food businesses must obtain FSSAI certification and
licenses.
3. Quality Testing
FSSAI conducts regular food quality tests.
4. Spreading Food Safety Awareness
It informs the public about the importance of safe food
consumption.
5. Maintaining Records and Data
FSSAI keeps track of all registered food businesses and
ensures compliance.
6. Advising the Government
FSSAI alerts the government about any food safety
threats and aids in policymaking.
Key FSSAI Initiatives
• Eat Right India: Ensures access to nutritious food.

• Clean Street Food: Trains street vendors on food safety.

• Diet4Life: Raises awareness about metabolic disorders.

• Save Food, Share Food, Share Joy: Encourages food

donation to prevent wastage.

CASE LAWS –
1. Ram Dayal & Ors. v. Emperor (1923)
• Facts: The accused was selling ghee adulterated with pig

fat.
• Issue: Whether this mixture qualifies as "noxious" under

the law.
• Held: The Privy Council held that mixing pig fat with

ghee offended the religious feelings of Hindus and

Muslims but was not considered "noxious as food."
"Noxious" referred to something injurious to health, not
merely offensive to sentiments.
2. M/S PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P.
(2010)
• Facts: The state government filed an FIR against PepsiCo

under Sections 272/273 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

for food adulteration. PepsiCo argued that these sections
were repealed by the Food Safety and Standards Act
(FSSA), 2006.
 • Issue: Whether IPC provisions applied in food
adulteration cases after the enactment of FSSA.
• Held: The Allahabad High Court applied the principle of

generalia specialibus non derogant, holding that FSSA

occupied the entire field of food safety, making IPC
provisions inapplicable.
3. State of Maharashtra v. Sayyad Hassan Sayyed Subham
(2018)
• Facts: The accused was prosecuted under both IPC and

FSSA for an act constituting an offence under both laws.

• Held: The Supreme Court ruled that prosecution can occur

under both IPC and FSSA, but the offender cannot be

punished twice for the same offence.
4. Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India
(2013)
• Facts: The petitioner alleged adulteration of soft drinks

with pesticides.
• Held: The Supreme Court held that under Article 21,

people are entitled to protection from hazardous food,

and under Article 47, the state is obligated to enforce
food safety laws. The court ordered periodic monitoring
of food markets and the implementation of food safety
standards.
5. Nestle India Ltd. v. Food Safety and Standards
Authority of India (2015)
• Facts: India’s FDA ordered the recall of Maggi noodles

for containing high levels of lead and MSG. Nestlé

initially denied the allegations, claiming compliance with
regulatory standards. However, after re-testing, Nestlé
voluntarily recalled Maggi noodles and destroyed unsafe
batches worth $50 million.
• Issue: The lead content in Maggi noodles and the validity

of the testing laboratories' results.

• Held: Foreign testing cleared Maggi of unsafe lead levels,

raising concerns about the reliability of Indian labs that

conducted initial tests.
6. Swami Achyutanand Tirth & Ors. v. Union of India &
Ors. (2016)
• Facts: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed to

address the widespread sale of adulterated milk across

India.
 • Held: The Supreme Court directed the government to
implement FSSA effectively and take steps to curb milk
adulteration. Specific directions were issued, including
accrediting laboratories, conducting spot tests, and
creating public awareness.
7. Cadbury Chocolate Worm Controversy (2003)
• Facts: Consumers reported finding worms in Cadbury

Dairy Milk chocolates, leading to complaints with the

Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
• Held: The FDA held that improper packaging led to

infestation at the retailer level. Cadbury launched new

packaging to address hygiene concerns and regain
consumer trust.
Loopholes in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
• Neglect of Unorganized Sector: Petty manufacturers,

hawkers, and retailers were overlooked, despite their

significance in the food sector.
• Inadequate Funding: The majority of funds were used

for infrastructure development, leaving little for

laboratory establishment and testing facilities.
• Understaffed and Bureaucratic: Many key positions

were filled by non-technical staff, creating inefficiencies.

• Licensing and Corruption: Licensing provisions may

promote corruption.
• Lack of Standardization: States followed different

standards, causing inconsistencies, as seen in the Maggi

case where lead levels varied across regions.