Supreme Court Backs Madras HC Order for Microplastic Warnings on Bottled Water, Salt, and Sugar

The Supreme Court of India on Monday refused to stay a Madras High Court order mandating that all PET bottles and plastic packaging used for water, salt, and sugar must carry a warning label stating the products “may contain micro/nano plastics.”

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta observed that there was “nothing wrong” with displaying such warnings, emphasizing the importance of public awareness regarding the presence of microplastics in food items.

The matter reached the apex court through a plea filed by the PET Packaging Association for Clean Environment. The association challenged a February 2026 order from the Madras High Court, which had directed the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to issue a notification within four weeks.

The High Court’s directive required manufacturers to include a bold, red-lettered label on all plastic/PET bottles selling water, as well as on plastic packaging for sugar and salt. The specific warning mandated was: “This [water/sugar/salt] may contain micro/nano plastics.”

During the proceedings, the counsel for the PET Packaging Association argued that such a warning could “create panic” among consumers. However, the bench remained unconvinced, noting that the market is increasingly consumer-driven and health-conscious.

READ ALSO  Acquittal in assets case: SC refuses to entertain plea challenging revision case against Tami Nadu Minister Ponmudy

“The government may be dragging its feet, but the High Court is very affirmative on this as reports have suggested the presence of microplastics,” the bench remarked. “Let the public be aware.”

Justice Vikram Nath further noted that consumer behavior is already shifting, stating, “People are checking and reducing the use of plastic bottles. There is nothing wrong in it [displaying the warning].”

The Supreme Court highlighted that the primary matter is still pending before the Madras High Court. Following the bench’s observations, the counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the plea.

The apex court allowed the withdrawal, granting the petitioners the liberty to approach the High Court to raise their grievances.

READ ALSO  Can Reservation in Promotion be Granted to a Person With Disability appointed under compassionate scheme?
Ad 20- WhatsApp Banner

Law Trend
Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles