New Delhi, Jan 20 (UNI) The Supreme Court today heard pleas challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s ban on halal-certified products.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta raised concerns about the impact of halal certification, arguing that it makes products costlier, compelling people across the country to buy higher-priced halal-certified items due to the demand of a few.
A bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih presided over the matter and scheduled the next hearing for the week commencing March 24, while noting that the petitioners remain protected from coercive action under previous Court orders.
The Court also directed the Union government to serve copies of its affidavit to the petitioners, allowing time for filing rejoinders.
During the proceedings, SG Mehta expressed astonishment over the range of products requiring halal certification, beyond meat-based items.
He stated, “Your Lordships would be shocked, as I was shocked yesterday. Even cement, iron bars, water bottles, atta (wheat flour), and besan (chickpea flour) are required to be halal-certified.
How can besan be halal or non-halal?” Alleging that halal certification agencies have made “a few lakh crores” through this process, Mehta suggested a broader issue for the Court to consider—whether non-believers should bear the financial burden of paying higher prices for halal-certified products.
Countering this, Senior Advocate M.R. Shamshad, representing the petitioners, explained that the Central government’s policies define halal certification as a matter of lifestyle, not limited to non-vegetarian food.
He cited examples, such as the use of alcoholic materials as preservatives and the role of charcoal gas in producing sparkling effects, to highlight the certification’s broader scope. He also argued that consuming halal-certified products remains a matter of choice and is not mandatory.
The Uttar Pradesh government banned the manufacture, sale, storage, and distribution of halal-certified products on November 18, citing public health concerns under Section 30(2)(d) of the Food Safety and Standards Act.
The government justified its decision based on a complaint by a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) youth wing representative, who alleged that halal certifying bodies issued forged certificates to boost sales among Muslims.
The ban, however, does not extend to export-oriented products.
The notification further stated: “Because of public health, food with halal certification is being banned within the limits of Uttar Pradesh. A ban is imposed with immediate effect on the manufacture, storage, distribution, and sale of such products, except for food produced for export.”
Amid backlash, the state government granted retailers a 15-day grace period to withdraw halal-certified products from shelves. It also directed 92 manufacturers using halal certification from non-accredited bodies to recall and repackage their goods.
Halal certification, signifying that a product complies with Islamic dietary laws, is issued by bodies such as the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind’s Halal Unit and the Halal Shariat Islamic Law Board. These organizations, accredited by the National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies, criticized the government’s decision as discriminatory.
The ban has been challenged in the Supreme Court by Halal India Private Limited and Jamiat Ulama-e-Maharashtra, who argue that it violates constitutional rights. The petitioners have sought the Court’s intervention to overturn the ban.
The matter will be heard further on March 24.