Your favourite packet of chips or bottle of cold drink could soon carry a red hexagon on the front, the kind of warning symbol usually reserved for hazard signs, not snacks. According to multiple reports, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has proposed exactly this: red-coloured warning labels reading "High Fat", "High Sugar", "High Salt" or "Highly Sweetened Beverage" on the front of packaged foods that cross certain nutrient thresholds.
Nothing has been finalised yet. Here's what has actually been proposed, how India got here, and what it could mean if it goes through.
How This Proposal Actually Came About
This isn't FSSAI's first attempt at front-of-pack labelling, and the road here has had a few turns. According to ThePrint, the Supreme Court had earlier, in February 2026, pushed FSSAI toward simple warning symbols after expressing dissatisfaction with the regulator's prior efforts on this front.
In early August, FSSAI instead proposed a numerical nutrition table listing daily reference values, reportedly 25g of added sugar, 10g of saturated fat and 5g of salt, alongside per-100g figures, leaving consumers to do the comparison themselves. Public health experts criticised this as burdensome compared to a simple, instantly readable warning label. Then, following a Supreme Court bench raising concerns about delays on August 13, FSSAI's newer proposal has shifted back toward the red hexagonal warning symbol format being reported now.
What's Actually Being Proposed
According to reports from Free Press Journal and Kashmir Reader, the proposal includes:
- A red hexagonal warning symbol on the front of pack, in a font size larger than the existing nutrition information table
- Labels reading "High Fat", "High Sugar", "High Salt" and/or "Highly Sweetened Beverage" depending on which nutrients cross the threshold
- Thresholds based on the Dietary Guidelines for Indians, 2024, issued by ICMR-NIN
- A phased rollout: Phase I would cover products high in two or more of these nutrients plus specified sweetened beverages, while Phase II would extend warnings to products high in even a single nutrient
FSSAI has stated the phased approach is meant to give the industry time to reformulate products, rather than an overnight switch.
What Would Likely Be Exempted
Based on current reporting, single-ingredient foods and products that are naturally, rather than artificially, high in these nutrients would likely be exempted, things like ghee, edible oils, salt, sugar, jaggery and honey. The logic is that a warning label on a jar of plain sugar or a bottle of cooking oil wouldn't tell consumers anything they don't already know from the product itself.
Why This Matters: The Health Case Behind It
This entire push traces back to a Supreme Court case linking excessive consumption of fat, sugar and salt to diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and certain cancers, concerns that are well documented in public health research generally, and that a public charitable trust had specifically petitioned the court over. The idea behind an interpretive warning label, as opposed to a table of numbers, is that it lets someone glance at a package for two seconds and understand the risk, rather than doing mental maths in a grocery aisle.
This Is Still a Proposal, Not a Finalised Rule
It's worth being direct about this: nothing here is confirmed as law yet. This is a regulatory proposal that has already changed shape once in the span of a few weeks, moving from a nutrition-table format to the red warning label format now being discussed. There is no confirmed date for when, or in what final form, these labels would actually appear on shelves. The specific gram thresholds, the exact wording, and the exemption list could all still change before anything is notified as a final rule.
If you're a consumer, the realistic takeaway right now is awareness, not an immediate change to what's on your kitchen shelf.
Where This Leaves Zero-Sugar Beverages
One category specifically called out in the proposal is "Highly Sweetened Beverage." If this rule does eventually take shape, sweetened drinks are one of the more likely categories to carry a warning label from day one.
For what it's worth, this is a standard Amaayu's water range already sits outside of. Amaayu Gut Health Water is formulated with zero sugar, zero colour and zero flavour, and Amaayu Alkaline Water is similarly sugar-free and zero-calorie, built around natural minerals rather than added sweeteners. Not because of this proposal specifically, that's simply how the products were formulated from the start, but it's a reasonable data point if you're already rethinking what's in your everyday drink.
Explore Amaayu's Zero-Sugar Range →
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the FSSAI red warning label rule already in effect?
No. As of now, this is a proposal that FSSAI has floated in the context of an ongoing Supreme Court matter. It has not been notified as a final regulation, and there's no confirmed timeline for when, or if, it will take its currently proposed form.
Which foods would get a warning label if this is implemented?
Based on current reporting, packaged foods high in two or more of added fat, added sugar or salt, along with certain sweetened beverages, would be covered in the first phase, according to FSSAI's proposal. A later phase would extend this to foods high in even one of these nutrients.
Would things like ghee, honey or sugar itself need a warning label?
Reports suggest single-ingredient foods and items naturally high in fat, sugar or salt, such as ghee, edible oils, sugar, jaggery and honey, would likely be exempted from the requirement.
Why did FSSAI change its proposal from a nutrition table to warning labels?
FSSAI's earlier nutrition-table proposal, made in early August, drew criticism from public health experts for requiring consumers to calculate risk themselves rather than seeing a clear warning. Following renewed pressure from the Supreme Court, the regulator's newer proposal has moved toward the simpler red warning label format.
When will these labels actually appear on products?
There's no confirmed date. This remains a proposal under regulatory and judicial process, and the timeline for any final notification, let alone actual implementation on packaging, hasn't been announced.
The Bottom Line
India's food labelling rules are visibly in motion right now, shaped by a Supreme Court case and a regulator that has revised its approach at least once already in recent weeks. Whatever the final label ends up looking like, and whenever it actually lands on shelves, the direction is clear: less room for packaged food to stay quiet about how much added fat, sugar or salt it's carrying.
This article is based on media reports of a regulatory proposal as of late August 2026 and reflects the information publicly available at the time of writing. This is a proposed rule, not a finalised law, and details including thresholds, exemptions and timelines may change before, or if, it is formally notified. This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or regulatory advice.
This article is brought to you by the Amaayu Wellness Team, who believe in everyday balance and wellness. For more wellness content, visit amaayu.com
