Delhi HC Sets Aside FSSAI Directive Barring Red Bull from Using 'Energy Drink' Label

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has set aside an order issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) that directed Austrian beverage producer Red Bull India to stop using the term "Energy Drink" on its products. 

Presiding over the petition, Justice Amit Mahajan allowed Red Bull's plea on the limited ground of violation of principles of natural justice. The court observed that the regulator passed the impugned directive abruptly without affording the company an opportunity to file a reply or explain its stance.

Red Bull had approached the High Court challenging the FSSAI's June 30, 2026 order, which required manufacturers to discontinue the "Energy Drink" descriptor within a 90-day window. The company also challenged a consequential communication dated July 17, 2026, issued to state food safety authorities directing enforcement against non-compliant products. The petitioner submitted that this communication triggered nationwide regulatory enforcement, leading to product seizures across various locations. Red Bull submitted that it has been continuously selling its beverages under the "Energy Drink" label in India since 2002.

In its petition, Red Bull pointed out that the sudden prohibition was introduced without any modification to underlying product safety standards, causing substantial regulatory uncertainty and impacting its commercial investments in India. The company relied upon a March 2024 FSSAI advisory and an April 2024 Union Health Ministry communication, asserting that the regulator had previously recognized the expression "Energy Drink" for licensed caffeinated beverages. It argued that the 2026 directive represented an unexplained departure from established positions, creating severe disruptions to its business operations.

During the proceedings, counsel representing the food safety authority argued that "energy drink" is not a recognized product category under existing food safety regulations. FSSAI submitted that its concern was strictly limited to the branding descriptor on the label rather than the composition of the product. The regulator further contended that its June 30 communication could be treated as a show-cause notice and pointed to subsequent meetings held with industry representatives where alternative terms like "caffeinated beverages" were discussed.

The High Court rejected the argument that subsequent discussions cured the lack of prior notice, noting that Red Bull was never formally called upon to explain why action should not be taken before the directive was issued. While setting aside the impugned order, the court clarified that it was not deciding the larger legal question regarding the permissible use of the descriptor. 

The court granted liberty to the FSSAI to take a fresh decision after issuing a proper show-cause notice and providing Red Bull a fair hearing in accordance with law.

Appearance: for the petitioners: Senior Advocates Sandeep Sethi and Suhail Dutt, with Advocates Abhixit Singh, Bhaskar Joshi, Krisna Gambhir, Shreya Sethi, Ritwik Sharma, Pavni Tuli, Sachdev Sharma, Meghna Saha, and Sakshi Rana.

Case title: Red Bull v. Union of India & Ors.