The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has issued notices to several food business operators (FBOs) for violating provisions of the FSS Act, 2006, including misleading brand names, trade names, product claims, labelling violations, and other consumer complaints. However, despite these regulatory actions, many flagged products continue to be available on store shelves and e-commerce platforms, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of enforcement.
The Enforcement Gap: Notices vs. Action
FSSAI issued a public notice on June 19, 2026, directing FBOs to take corrective measures. Yet, as of late June, products with 'objectionable' packaging remain accessible to consumers. This delay stems from a significant time gap between the issuance of notices and the actual removal of products from the market. According to industry insiders, the process involves multiple steps: FSSAI identifies violations, issues show-cause notices, allows a response period, and only then mandates corrective action or recalls. This bureaucratic timeline can stretch weeks or months.
Consumer Complaints and Misleading Claims
Consumer complaints have highlighted instances where product labels claim health benefits not approved by FSSAI, such as 'diabetic-friendly' or 'sugar-free' without proper certification. In one case, a popular snack brand was found using a brand name that implied it was a healthier alternative, despite high sugar content. FSSAI’s June 19 notice specifically called out such practices, but enforcement remains sluggish.
E-Commerce Platforms and Accountability
E-commerce platforms like Blinkit, Amazon, and Flipkart often continue listing flagged products until they receive explicit removal orders from FSSAI or the brand itself. A snapshot from Blinkit’s e-store showed products still available days after the notice. FSSAI has urged platforms to self-regulate, but without strict penalties, compliance is voluntary. According to a food safety expert, “The lack of real-time monitoring allows violators to exploit the gap between detection and action.”
Impact on Consumer Safety
The prolonged presence of misleading products undermines consumer trust and poses health risks. For instance, products with exaggerated protein claims may mislead athletes or health-conscious buyers. FSSAI’s mandate includes protecting consumers from fraud, but the current system prioritizes due process over speed. A senior FSSAI official stated, “We are working to streamline the process, but legal requirements for show-cause notices are necessary to ensure fairness.”
Industry Response and Corrective Measures
Some FBOs have responded by reformulating products or updating labels, but many resist until forced. FSSAI has the power to impose fines and suspend licenses, but these actions take time. In 2025, FSSAI issued over 500 notices for labelling violations, yet only 30% of products were removed within a month. The regulator is now exploring faster mechanisms, such as pre-clearance of health claims and stricter e-commerce compliance.
The Path Forward
To close the enforcement gap, experts recommend real-time data sharing between FSSAI and e-commerce platforms, mandatory recall timelines, and higher penalties for non-compliance. Consumer awareness also plays a key role; FSSAI’s social media campaigns have helped, but more direct action is needed. As one consumer rights advocate noted, “Until FSSAI can enforce immediate removal, the notice remains just a piece of paper.”
