2025 Supreme(Raj) 2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
IN RE: In the matter of saving the minor children, women and citizens from malnutrition or obesity– which is affecting their physical and mental health.
Decided on : 01-07-2025
The right to food and health are fundamental human rights interconnected to dignity, demanding state obligations to ensure adequate nutrition and address malnutrition and obesity among vulnerable populations.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 21 - Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Article 25 - National Food Security Act, 2013 - Sections 4, 5, and 6 - Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 - Emphasizing the interconnection between the right to food and right to health, the court highlighted their importance for life with dignity. The absence of adequate nutrition adversely affects physical and mental health, particularly for women and children, thus violating fundamental rights. The court mandated that the Central and State Governments must ensure implementation of relevant statutory provisions to eliminate malnutrition and obesity. (Paras 3, 5, 10, 28)
(B) Public Health - The state’s obligation to protect minors from malnutrition and obesity - The court stressed that statutory authorities must enforce laws regarding nutrition and food safety, holding them accountable for the health of children and society at large, emphasizing the need for action against junk food consumption. (Paras 18, 21, 28)
Facts of the case:
The court took suo moto cognizance regarding malnutrition and obesity affecting citizens, especially minors, due to failure in implementing food security and health laws. The failure of various statutory bodies in ensuring the availability of nutritious food was identified.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the current failure to implement existing laws led to severe malnutrition and obesity, necessitating urgent action.
Issues: The primary issues included the accountability of state authorities in providing adequate nutritional support and actions against unhealthy food practices.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled on the interdependence of the rights to food and health, emphasizing the statutory duty of the state to protect its citizens' welfare.
Result: Notice issued to respondents for compliance and reports on protective measures to be taken.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right to food as a human right (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. interconnection of food, health, and dignity (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. national food security act provisions (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. impact of nutrition on future generations (Para 12) |
| 5. state's obligation to implement food security laws (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 21) |
| 6. encouragement of traditional foods for health (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. judicial notice on malnutrition and responsibility of state (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
ORDER :
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J.
By the Court:
“Without food it is difficult to remember God and hunger eats into the ethos of culture.”
-Mahatma Gandhi
1. Atharva Veda emphasizes the vital role of food in sustaining life energies, health and overall well-being. It highlights that proper nourishment is essential for strength, longevity and prosperity, stressing upon the connection between food and divine grace, suggesting that proper nourishment and food is not for just sustenance but is a blessing.
2. The right to food and right to health are interconnected human rights, both are essential for a life of dignity. The right to food, as recognized in International Law, and many National Constitutions, encompasses access to safe, nutritious and sufficient food. Similarly, the right to health, which is also a fundamental human right, includes access to timely and adequate health care, sanitation and other facilities necessary for physical and mental well-being.
3. The right to food is recognized by Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 as part of the right to an adequate standard of living. It says “Everyone has the right to a standard living adequate for health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food…”
4. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which is part of the International Bill of Human Rights, recognizes and affirms the Right to Adequate Food as an integral aspect of the right to an adequate standard of living. It also explicitly recognizes “the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger”.
5. Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for the fundamental right to the protection of life and personal liberty. This Article mandates the State to ensure the right to life of citizens, which includes the right to life with dignity with decent food.
6. Life without liberty would result in some or other form of slavery. Liberty cannot be there to a person having an empty stomach. The individual’s right to life will have no meaning if the State fails to provide adequate food or food articles.
7. Not getting adequate and balanced nutritious food affects both physical and mental health leading to malnutrition. It seriously and significantly impacts the mental health and well being of children and women.
8. The Constitution of India with the object of securing to all its citizens, social and economic justice, contains various Articles which empower to make special law in favour of women and children. Article 47 of the Constitution which forms the part of Directive Principles of State Policy provides that the State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties. The Government of India with the above objective launched a welfare scheme, namely, Integrated Child Development Services Scheme in the year 1975. The Scheme was designed as an early childhood development programme aimed to address health, nutrition and development needs of young children who are the future of India along-with pregnant and nursing mothers. The Scheme was designed to promote holistic development of children under 6 years of age. The Hon’ble Apex Court in a Public Interest Litigation in Writ Petition No.196 of 2001, People’s Union for Civil Liberties vs. Union of India and others, had issued various directions for protection of right to food of the poor and the underprivileged sections including