The Delhi High Court noted that every person has a right to know as to what he/she is consuming. The court basically ordered to ensure that there is full disclosure whether the ingredients used are extracted from plant or animal sources, or manufactured in a laboratory. The central concern was to segregate non-vegetarian food items from vegetarian food items. The party that filed the complaint claimed that they are pure vegetarians and consuming non-veg food items is contrary to their religious belief. This concern might resonate with a large section of the Hindu community in the nation, who may be unknowingly eating non-vegetarian food items, despite strictly following pure vegetarianism. The sensitivity of the issue is an open fact as many people from the community strictly adhere to avoidance of non-veg food items. Further, the meat of particular animals may also be against the religious sentiments of other communities. Currently, as is known, food companies label green and brown dots to distinguish vegetarian food items from non-vegetarian food items. But the High Court highlighted that a certain provision of the Regulation 2.2.2 (4) of the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labeling) Regulations, 2011, is being used by food companies to flout the requirement of disclosure. While the provision demands the disclosure of the presence of non-vegetarian food items — other than milk and milk products — along with their listing, it exempts compound ingredients whose composition is less than 5 per cent from listing. Food companies generally pass off such products with a green label. The court gave a particular example of an ingredient coded as E631 which denotes disodium inosinate — a food additive prepared from fish or pig meat. Constituting less than five per cent, the additive is listed merely as E631 and often the brown dot is avoided. The violation of the Food Safety and Standards Regulation contradicts certain fundamental rights. Firstly, as the court pointed out, the consuming population has the right to know what things they are consuming. Secondly, the right to follow one's religion is also obstructed by the violations. While it may be argued on the scientific basis that food is food and it must be seen in terms of nutritional attributes, the belief system and the spiritual sanctity associated with it cannot be ignored. What nutrition is to the body, spirituality is to the soul. Beyond religion, a person cannot be directly or indirectly forced to eat or not eat something against his/her conviction, as this will stand contrary to the basic tenet of individual rights. Delhi High Court's intervention is no doubt a good move. The spirit of the judgment needs to be maintained in action by the executive through ensuring proper implementation of the same. The court has firstly pulled the food companies for their neglect and non-compliance with the Food Safety regulations. It further termed the approach of food producer countries to be deceitful. The court has even warned of punitive action in case of non-compliance and fundamental rights violation. Furthermore, the court warned the Food Safety and Security Authority (FSSAI) of India for failing to control the situation. The court rightly warned that failing officers may face prosecution under the law. The solution, however, maybe a little more complicated, and demand much more than mere punitive action. It would take a strong administrative will to bring positive change. Non-disclosure of non-vegetarian components in food is just one small component of the food labelling conundrum in India. While the non-vegetarian food may hurt the religious sentiments of a particular community, the use of harmful chemical components could in general afflict the health conditions of the people. Improper food labelling has been debated for a long in the country, without much positive difference. It is hoped that Delhi High Court's judgment will trigger a change in the food labelling system, which will later influence other required changes in the food labelling system in India. Food is everyone's concern, and its safety, quality and preference should undoubtedly be accorded utmost priority. A start has to be made immediately, as there is a long way to go.