Food Safety Laws Must Not Stay on Paper: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Adulteration

The Court called food adulteration an increasingly recognised global public-health problem (paras 1-2). It cited Health and Family Welfare Ministry records that more than 20% of food is adulterated or substandard, and an FSSAI survey on milk that found nearly 70% adulterated, water being the most common adulterant, and even detergent as an adulterant (para 5). It listed common methods, from chemical ripening and dyes to clay, pebbles, lead or mercury and false expiry dates (para 6). Rajasthan's 2020 ‘Sudh Ke Liye Yudh’ campaign offered Rs. 51,000 to informants and set up State and district committees, but ran mainly at festival time (para 13).

The Court treated safe food as part of the right to life: Article 21 protects people against hazardous and injurious food articles, and under Article 47 the welfare State must ensure that protection; adulteration is a concurrent-list subject, so both the Union and the States can enact penal laws (para 7). The 2006 Food Safety and Standards Act, which repealed the 1954 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, provides for accredited laboratories, sampling by Food Safety Officers, analysis by Food Analysts and penalties (para 8). In the Court's view the 2006 Act has loopholes: the unorganised sector and the agricultural sector producing primary food are left out (para 9). Testing laboratories are lacking, the food authority is understaffed and underfunded, and there are doubts about laboratories' procedures across States (para 10). A 2020 amendment Bill was lying in cold storage (para 11). The laws are descriptive; the problem is poor implementation, and the Centre and the State are expected to take adulteration seriously (para 12). Laws, policies and schemes must be implemented in letter and spirit, not remain "a piece of paper in the records only", and campaigns must run daily, not only in festival and wedding seasons (para 13).