The Court has sought information on the timeline the food safety regulator envisages for implementing the FOPL regulations, including whether it will initially be voluntary before becoming mandatory. It has also sought details on how threshold levels for the nutrients of concern, including high fat, high sugar, and high salt, will be determined. For fat and sugar, SC asked whether threshold limits will be calculated based on total sugar and saturated fat, and whether trans-fat levels will be factored into the fat-content calculations.
Questions over red hexagon design and thresholds
It also enquired about the dimensions of the proposed hexagonal warning labels, how and where the proposed “red hexagon” will be placed, and why FSSAI has suggested a “combined or singular” hexagon for two or more nutrients of concern.Raising concerns about rising obesity in school-age children and adolescents, the Court has also stressed the need for “nutritional literacy” among schools. “In recognition of the vulnerable position that children are in vis-à-vis impulse or uninformed dietary decision-making, we are of the view that some action must be taken in this regard,” it stated in its order.
Court examines phased implementation
One key issue has been how the FOPL regulations will be implemented. “What is the basis for the FSSAI to suggest the inclusion of food products high in ‘two or more’ nutrients-of-concern and specified sweetened beverages in Phase I, and the inclusion of food products high in ‘any one’ nutrient-of-concern in Phase II respectively?” the Supreme Court’s order stated.On Thursday, FSSAI said it is open to implementing warning labels in one go, rather than its earlier suggestion of enforcing them in two phases.
Published on September 11, 2026
