Ram Gaua Raksha Dal moves Delhi High Court for labelling consumables based on animal ingredients used for manufacture

The Delhi High Court Thursday issued notice to Central government and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) on a plea seeking formulation of guidelines and policy to make it mandatory for the manufacturers to label all the consumable items not only according to the ingredients used in them but items used in their manufacture as well (Ram Gaua Raksha Dal v UOI and Ors)..The notice was issued by a Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh on a petition filed by a trust belonging to members the Namdhari sect named Ram Gaua Rakhsha Dal. The sect professes strict vegetarianism and therefore argued that a knowledge of ingredients that goes into manufacture of everyday use items is their fundamental right under Article 19, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India..The petition filed through advocate Rajat Aneja argued that a committee should be set up to examine the possibility of labelling all consumables. Taneja argued that the petitioners are at a loss as to which products are fit for consumption or use by those who profess vegetarianism since manufacture of many eatables require non-vegetarian products.He cited the example of white sugar and sabudana (sago) which are commonly used by people who are on fast. The petitioner further informed that animal fats are also used in manufacture of crayons and artificial leather as well..Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, who was also present at the hearing, said that the petitioner has ventilated a genuine call and that the consumers have a right to know. “The expanse is so much. We don't know the sheer expanse of the process which involves use of animal ingredients in making of these products therefore some guidelines need to be formulated by the court,” Sharma said.Meanwhile advocate Ajay Digpaul appearing for the FSSAI, said that the rules require manufacturers to give all the details on their packets and in case there is any violation there are penal provisions as well..The Bench noted that the issues raised by the petitioner have a bearing on a person’s right to life protected under Article 21 and to follow and profess their beliefs protected under Article 25. “We therefore direct the respondents to seriously examine the issues raised and to respond to the petition within the next three weeks,” the court noted in its order..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.