Do we all remember Nestle – Maggi noodles adulteration case? Recently in the last week of October, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has notified all the commissioners for food safety in all states and also in the union territories, directors, and also the central licensing authorities of India to ensure a special drive to check the food safety of milk, sweets, etc. during the festive season in India. Why do we have such an authority to check these kinds of food products, in specific all the food products? It is to ensure there are safe and secure food products available to the people at large and also to ensure the good health of those people. The importance of food shall only be known to the person who does not have food three times a day. So, there are these many importances that have been given to a commodity called food. This article will be looking into the food adulteration that happens in India, the laws that are present before us to prosecute, and the measures taken so far by the duty-bound Indian government with respect to the prevention of food adulteration.
Laws pertaining to Food safety:
Firstly, starting from the supreme law of our land – The constitution, Part 4 of the Indian constitution provides for the directive principles of state policy, under which the Indian government both at the center as well as at the state level has the obligation or a duty to protect and preserve the public health which includes more importance to the women and the child welfare. Even though this is not enforceable, having such provisions would make the states aware of their duties, and in case of failure of the same, various welfare organizations and even a few court orders can at least make an awareness of these obligations to the executives.
Before looking into the laws present in India, we should know the definitions of what food is and what amounts to adulteration as per law. For the same, we refer to the old and repealed law named – Prevention of Food adulteration act, 1954 – which was repealed by the new law called the Food Safety and Standards act of 2006. Section 3(a) of FSSA, 2006 defines the term ‘Adulterant’. It states as follows,
“Any material which is or could be employed for making the food unsafe or sub-standard or misbranded or containing extraneous matter”
On the other hand, section 3(j) defines the term food. It includes all the items which are consumable by the consumers and can range many materials and can also be added or deleted through an amendment from time to time.
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – an overview:
Let us look into the objects and reasons for the enactment of this act of 2006. The purpose of the act was to establish the food safety and standard authority in India, which would give scientifically proven standards for the food articles. The act also regulates the manufacture, selling, import, storage, and distribution and ensures wholesome safety food for consumption purposes. It has repealed the previous enactments such as the prevention of adulteration act and other rules and regulations thereto to give way to this act of 2006.
Section 4 to 17 under Chapter 2 of the Food safety act, 2006 provides for Food safety and standard authority of India. Section 4 talks about the union government’s power to establish an authority for the purposes and functions stated under the act of 2006, whose functions and duties have been provided under section 16 of the act – which includes regulation and monitoring of activities of registered manufacturers. The food authority shall have a head office in Delhi and shall also have at other places within the territory of India. Section 5 deals with the composition of such authority, which is of twenty-two, and one-third of that will be represented by women.
Apart from this, section 18 under chapter 3 of the act provides for the general principles that are to be followed for the administration of the act. These principles form the basis for the state, union governments, and food authorities to perform their function to protect human lives and also the interests of the consumers as a whole by ensuring safe and fair practices at every point in the supply chain.
Section 18(3) states that there the provisions of this section shall not be applicable to the farmers, fishermen, or any other persons who form part of farmers and are notified by the authority.
As part of general provisions relating to food articles, section 19 under chapter 4 states that none of the articles of food shall contain any food additive or processing aid unless and until the same is in accordance with the provisions of the act.
Lastly and most importantly, chapter 7 of the act provides for enforcement of the act, which gives certain responsibilities to the authorities for the performance of the same, which includes the duty of registration and providing the licenses to the manufacturers of food articles. It also provides for the penalties in case of violation of the provisions of the act under sections 33 to 35.
Famous Adulteration cases in India:
One of the famous adulterations that India knows very much about was the Maggi adulteration case in the year 2015. It has been observed that the employees of the company had told the adulteration that took place while manufacturing. The problem was brought before the Bombay High court after the order was made by FSSAI in the case of Nestle India Limited v. Food safety and standards authority of India (2015). It was alleged by the petitioner company that the procedure was not done as per the rules and regulations of the act and the samples tested by the food analyst were improper. On the other hand, the respondent authority alleged that the compliance was not according to the laws, and the maintainability of the case itself was questioned. The Bombay High Court, in this case, allowed the petitioner company – Maggi, after hearing both sides, but it opined that as the court is concerned with the health of the public, the company was asked to send around five samples from each of the batches, which are in their possession to three food laboratories for the certification and for the recognition from NABL as per the provisions of the act of 2006.
Recently, Yippee noodles from ITC was also been alleged to have adulterated the food articles. But the same was held to be not true and the company was allowed to function in the case of ITC limited v. Food Safety Inspector (2021).
