On Monday, January 21, the Uttar Pradesh government highlighted concerns about the halal certification process in the Supreme Court. It revealed that a wide range of products beyond meat, such as cement, iron rods, and water bottles, were being labeled as 'halal certified,' requiring compliance with Islamic law. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the state government, expressed shock over the inclusion of such non-meat items in the halal certification framework.
The court was reviewing petitions contesting the ban implemented by the state of Uttar Pradesh on halal-certified products within its jurisdiction. “So far as Halal meat etc. is concerned, nobody can have any objection… even cement used is to be halal-certified. Sariyas (iron bars) used have to be halal-certified. Water bottles are required to be halal-certified. Even atta (wheat flour) and besan (chickpea flour) have to be halal-certified. How can besan halal or non-halal?” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that agencies responsible for issuing halal certification labels were generating crores of revenue by mandating halal certificates for products beyond just meat.
Halal Certified. (Representative Image) | Swarajya
The state informed the bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih, that while halal certification on meat was not objectionable, such certification was unnecessary for products like cement and water bottles. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate M.R. Shamshad, representing the petitioner, argued that halal certification is not limited to non-vegetarian food and is extensively addressed in the Centre's policy.
Mehta further contended that halal certification on various products was inflating prices, compelling those who do not adhere to halal standards to bear unnecessary additional costs.
He also highlighted the role of religious beliefs and practices regarding meat, noting that Islam requires it to be halal, while other religions prefer it to be jhatka. “Another concern. Suppose I am Sikh and for me, halal meat is prohibited. Halal would mean that the animal would die slowly. Other religion says that you should not. Then he will have to consume halal because it has to be halal certified. There are several issues, my lord,” Mehta added.
In response, Shamshad clarified that purchasing halal-certified products was entirely optional and not obligatory for customers. “All are voluntary. Nobody is forcing,” he said. Subsequently, Mehta stated that multiple FIRs had been filed against Halal India Pvt Limited and Jamiat Ulama for breaching the law and disregarding government-issued notifications on various occasions.
UP Bans 'Halal Certified' Food Items for Violating Food Safety and Standards Act
In November 2023, the Food Safety and Drug Administration issued a directive to impose an immediate ban on the production, storage, distribution, and sale of ‘Halal certified’ food items, citing concerns over public health. The banned "Halal-certified items" include food, medicines, and cosmetics.
The Uttar Pradesh government stated that Halal certification functions as a parallel system, as India already has the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to regulate food quality. They argued that Halal certification contravenes the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, under which the FSSAI was established.
The notification highlighted that Halal certification appears on labels of certain products such as dairy, sugar, bakery goods, peppermint oil, savory snacks, edible oils, and more. It further noted that the Food Safety and Standards Act of 2006, which replaced eight older laws, led to the creation of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, the nation's top regulatory body for food items.
FIR Registered Against Companies Selling Halal Products
The Uttar Pradesh police subsequently filed FIRs against multiple companies selling 'Halal-certified' products with forged documentation. The companies implicated include Halala India Private Limited from Chennai, Jamiat Ulema Hind Halal Trust from Delhi, Halal Council of India from Mumbai, and Jamiat Ulema from Mumbai. These companies were found to be selling various products such as bathing soaps, spices, snacks, dairy, and garments, all carrying counterfeit Halal certifications. The Lucknow Police charged the accused under sections 120b/153a/298, 384, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 505 of the IPC.
The term "Halal" refers to products, services, or systems deemed lawful (Tayeib) or permissible according to Islamic Shariah law, which do not contain or consist of anything considered unlawful (haram) under Islamic law. It also refers to actions permitted by Shariah law that are not punishable.
Halal Trusts Reject Claims of Fostering Communal Divides Among Consumers
Notably, the two petitions were filed by Halal India Private Limited and Jamiat Ulam-e-Hind Halal Trust Maharashtra, challenging the state's notification banning the manufacture, sale, storage, and distribution of halal-certified products in Uttar Pradesh.
In January 2024, the Supreme Court granted protection from any coercive action against Mahmood Madani, the chief of Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust, and other office-bearers. A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta ordered that Uttar Pradesh police refrain from taking coercive action against Madani and the others.
The counsel for Jamiat argued that despite the organization's full cooperation with the investigation and submission of all required documents, the state government summoned the trust's president, asking him to appear in person without clarifying what was needed from him. The petitioners argued that they had been wrongfully implicated despite having no involvement in the issuance of halal certification.
One petition claimed that the FIR contained serious accusations against the organization for promoting halal products, alleging that this was a strategy by companies to sow communal discord among consumers.
The petition also argued that the notification was “arbitrary and based on unreasonable classification,” with the ban on the manufacture, sale, storage, and distribution of halal-certified products being imposed immediately in the interest of “public health.”
It is important to note that the issue of halal meat and its religious implications, as raised by the Solicitor General in the Supreme Court, is legitimate. Representing the state in the Supreme Court, he pointed out that while Islam mandates meat to be halal, other religions believe it should be jhatka.
Resistance Against the 'Halal Economy'
As mentioned previously, many businesses have now begun serving only halal meat to cut costs associated with maintaining separate supply chains for halal and non-halal meat. This leaves people who may not be comfortable with halal meat, or those whose religions permit only jhatka meat, with no choice. When ordering meat at a restaurant, halal is the default option.
Moreover, for meat to be considered halal, the animal must be slaughtered by a Muslim. To achieve economies of scale, the meat industry operates large abattoirs that rely exclusively on Muslim workers. As a result, certain Hindu communities, particularly Dalits who were traditionally butchers, lose out on employment opportunities in the sector.
The halal economy now extends beyond meat products to include pharmaceuticals, personal care items, cosmetics, and even flour, all of which bear halal certification. As this market grows, it risks limiting job prospects in these sectors to individuals from a single religion. Additionally, this parallel certification system operates without oversight or checks from the government.
Given that the government already has established norms, quality parameters, and regulatory requirements for certifying products fit for marketing, there seems to be little need for such an independent certification system. This system also poses a threat to private companies that do not offer halal-certified products, potentially leading to higher prices for halal-certified goods and fostering a monopoly in the market.
Comments