The Supreme Court has sought detailed information from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India on the proposed front of pack warning labels for packaged food products that are high in fat, sugar and salt.
The court has asked the food regulator to provide clear specifications regarding how the proposed warning labels will appear on food packets. The questions cover the shape, size, colour and placement of the labels, as well as the timeline for implementing the proposed system.
A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran raised the questions while examining the proposed front of pack labelling framework. The court gave FSSAI 10 days to provide its response to the 13 questions.
The Supreme Court noted that progress had been made on the issue but observed that several aspects of practical implementation required further clarification. The court particularly wanted the regulator to explain how the warning label would be designed and displayed so that consumers could understand the information easily.
Front of pack labelling is intended to provide consumers with important nutritional information directly on the front of packaged food products. The objective is to make it easier for consumers to identify products containing high levels of nutrients such as fat, sugar and salt.
The court has also raised questions about the size of the proposed label. It sought clarity on whether the size would be determined according to the total area of the front of the package or whether a standard size would be prescribed for products. The court indicated that the design should be sufficiently clear and visible to consumers.
Another important issue concerns the colour and shape of the warning symbol. Recent proceedings have referred to a red hexagonal warning label as part of the proposed approach for identifying packaged foods high in fat, sugar or salt. The court wants FSSAI to provide clear details rather than leaving important elements of implementation open to interpretation.
The court has also asked about the placement of the warning information on food packets. This is significant because consumers often make purchasing decisions quickly, particularly in retail stores and increasingly through online platforms. A clearly visible front of pack warning could help consumers identify nutritional concerns before purchasing a product.
The rise of online food shopping has added another dimension to the labelling debate. Consumers purchasing packaged food through digital platforms may rely on photographs and product descriptions instead of physically examining the packaging. The court has therefore sought clarity on how the proposed system would remain effective in changing purchasing environments.
Children have emerged as another important focus of the proceedings. The Supreme Court asked the Centre how children could be made aware of the potential health risks associated with unhealthy food and how nutritional literacy could be incorporated into school education.
The court has expressed concern about children developing unhealthy eating habits at an early age. It has therefore sought information on whether students are being taught how to understand food labels and make informed dietary choices.
The issue is part of a wider discussion about foods that contain high levels of fat, sugar and salt, commonly referred to as HFSS foods. Health authorities and policymakers have increasingly focused on improving consumer awareness about the nutritional content of packaged foods.
FSSAI has been working on changes to food labelling and display requirements. Its current regulatory framework includes provisions concerning nutritional information, while further amendments and proposals have been considered in recent years. The regulator's official website shows that the Food Safety and Standards Labelling and Display Regulations have undergone multiple amendments, including changes in 2025 and 2026.
FSSAI has also been developing regulatory measures relating to food products high in added fat, added sugar or salt. In August 2026, the authority published a draft amendment concerning safe food and balanced diets for children in schools, including definitions relating to foods high in added fat, added sugar or salt.
The Supreme Court has also questioned the proposed two phase approach to implementation. Under the framework discussed before the court, the first phase would cover products high in at least two of the specified nutrients and highly sweetened beverages, while the second phase would extend the labelling requirements to products high in any one of the specified nutrients.
The court has sought a scientifically justified and clearly defined timeline for the second phase. It expressed concern that without a firm timeline, implementation could be delayed indefinitely.
The proceedings are significant because food labelling affects consumers, manufacturers, retailers and regulators. Food companies may need to modify packaging and product information if new requirements are formally introduced. Consumers, meanwhile, could receive more prominent information about the nutritional characteristics of packaged foods.
The court's questions do not themselves amount to final implementation of a new nationwide warning label system. FSSAI must first respond to the questions, after which the court can consider the regulator's position and the next steps in the proceedings.
The case also highlights the importance of making food information accessible to people with different levels of literacy and nutritional awareness. A warning label that is clear, prominent and easy to understand could potentially help consumers make more informed decisions.
At the same time, the effectiveness of front of pack labelling will depend on the final design, enforcement, consumer awareness and consistent implementation across food products.
The Supreme Court's intervention has therefore placed renewed focus on the proposed food warning label framework. By seeking specific answers on the shape, size, colour, placement and implementation timeline, the court has asked FSSAI to provide greater clarity on how the proposed system would work in practice.
The court's questions regarding children also broaden the issue beyond packaging. They point to the importance of nutritional education in schools and the need to help young consumers understand food choices from an early age.
The next stage will depend on FSSAI's response to the 13 questions within the 10 day period. The regulator's explanation could provide greater clarity on the proposed design and implementation of front of pack food warnings and the measures planned to improve nutritional awareness among children.