Obesity crisis: SC tells Centre to enforce junk food warning labels or face orders
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has issued a firm ultimatum to the central government over the implementation of front-of-pack warning labels on junk food, expressing concern that rising obesity, particularly among children, cannot be treated as a minor issue. The Court said that if the Union does not act on its own, it will proceed to pass further directions.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran made the remarks while hearing a public interest litigation filed by the NGO '3S and Our HEALTH Society', which approached the Court through advocate Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi. The Court took note of the fact that the number of overweight school-going children and adolescents increased from 2% to 10% between 2000 and 2022, calling this a major health concern.
The bench linked the issue of food safety to the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. It observed that food items high in salt, sugar, saturated fat and calories could lead to serious health risks. Clearer nutrition information, the Court said, would help consumers make healthier choices and reduce the burden of lifestyle diseases.
The Court did not hide its displeasure with the government's stance on matching international standards. “If the Union does it on its own, well and good, otherwise we shall proceed to pass further directions... We do not approve the stance of the Union when it says it is not possible to match with international standards, more particularly, developed countries. Should India remain as an underdeveloped country? That’s the question we are putting forward for the Union to consider,” the bench said in its order.
The government has so far shown reluctance to implement front-of-pack warning labels on packaged and ultra-processed foods, despite global evidence that such labels help consumers identify products with excessive salt, sugar or fat. Countries like Chile, Mexico and several European nations have already adopted similar mandates, and the Court appeared to want India not to lag behind.
The scale of the problem is underlined by data from the Economic Survey 2025-26, which shows that India’s ultra-processed food market increased by more than 150% between 2009 and 2023. During the same period, obesity levels reportedly doubled in the country. These figures reflect a growing public health challenge that disproportionately affects children and adolescents, who are increasingly exposed to high-calorie, low-nutrition foods.
The Supreme Court’s message is clear: the health of people cannot be compromised for commercial interests or administrative convenience. By invoking Article 21, the Court has elevated the issue from a matter of consumer choice to a fundamental right. The order asks the central government to take a decision on its own, failing which the Court is willing to step in with enforceable directions.
This development is significant because it puts the spotlight on the regulatory framework governing food labelling in India. Public health experts have long argued that without clear warning labels, consumers are unable to make informed decisions, especially children who are drawn to colourful packaging and aggressive marketing of junk food. The Court’s intervention may force a policy shift that could have long-term benefits for public health.
The matter is now expected to be heard further, with the government likely to respond to the Court’s queries. The coming weeks will reveal whether the Centre will adopt the international best practices suggested by the Court or face judicial direction to do so.
