E-Paper
Panchkula: In 6 years, only 11 food adulteration cases have landed in court
During the festive season, the risk of unsafe sweets and bakery products entering the market increases sharply. Yet, official checks are very limited in the city.
Despite a growing population of nearly 6.5 lakh and thousands of daily transactions involving sweets, bakery items, and other food products, the Panchkula district food safety department is facing strong criticism for a surprisingly low number of raids and inspections. This inadequate enforcement becomes especially concerning during the festive season, when the risk of unsafe or substandard food flooding the market increases sharply. Official data reveals a striking lack of legal action, with only 11 cases under the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA) reaching a local court over the past six years—averaging just two to three criminal cases annually.
With thousands of shops selling sweets, bakery items and other food products daily, the number of raids and inspections by the district food safety department remains surprisingly low.
During the festive season, the risk of unsafe sweets and bakery products entering the market increases sharply. Yet, official checks are very limited in the city.
According to available details, only 11 cases under the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA) reached a local Panchkula court in the last six years. On average, merely two to three criminal cases are filed under the Act each year.
Currently, nine cases are pending in the district court under the FSSA between 2020 and 2025, while only two cases from 2021 have been decided so far.
A senior food safety officer said the department issues strict warnings to food business operators, especially during festivals. “During Navratri, I personally conducted inspections at eight to nine shops. Warnings are being given to shopkeepers not to indulge in selling unsafe food, mis-branded or unhygienic products,” he said.
However, residents believe the department’s action is inadequate. SK Nayar, president of the Citizens’ Welfare Association and a resident of Sector 15, alleged that officials generally target small shopkeepers while ignoring larger establishments. “Last year, despite repeated requests, only a few raids were carried out, and those too just for eyewash,” he said.
Explaining the process, the food safety officer said samples are collected and sent for testing. “If reports show unsafe or substandard material, cases of unsafe food are filed in the CJM court, while matters of mis-branding, operating without a licence or substandard products go to the ADC court for penalties. Only two to three cases reach the CJM court each year, with most cases related to sub-standard products,” he admitted.
In two cases of 2021, the CJM court convicted shop proprietors in June 2022 under Section 63 of the FSSA and imposed a fine of ₹4,000 each. The court also directed them to remain present until the rising of the court.
What the Act says
Sections 50 to 67 of the Food Safety and Standards Act prescribe fines and punishments for violations such as selling unsafe or substandard food, mis-branding, misleading advertisements or labels, food containing extraneous matter, failure to comply with food safety officer directions, possession of adulterated items, providing false information, and carrying out business without a licence.
