FSSAI Issues 9 Notices to Swiggy Instamart Over Food Safety Breaches

FSSAI Issues 9 Notices to Swiggy Instamart Over Food Safety Breaches | Quick Digest
India's food regulator, FSSAI, has issued nine notices to Swiggy Instamart following numerous consumer complaints regarding the delivery of expired, spoiled, and contaminated food products. The notices also cite issues with licensing, grievance redressal, and overall food safety compliance. Swiggy has been directed to provide a detailed explanation and compliance report.

Key Highlights

  • FSSAI issued nine notices to Swiggy Instamart.
  • Complaints involved expired, spoiled, contaminated food products.
  • Allegations include rotten eggs, contaminated infant formula.
  • Licensing irregularities and poor grievance redressal also flagged.
  • Swiggy asked for detailed explanation and compliance report.
  • Separate 'Toing' license issue already resolved by Swiggy.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), the nation's apex food regulator, has taken significant action against quick commerce platform Swiggy Instamart, issuing nine notices over multiple alleged food safety violations. These notices stem from a barrage of consumer complaints reporting the supply of expired, spoiled, rotten, contaminated, and otherwise unsafe food products through the platform. The complaints detail a range of serious issues, including the delivery of expired products such as 'Healthify 100% Whey Protein 1 kg' and 'Noice Homestyle Madras Mixture with Peanuts'. Consumers also reported receiving 'Akshayakalpa Organic Eggs' that were expired, rotten, emitted a foul odour, and showed clear signs of contamination, rendering them unfit for human consumption. Similar allegations were made regarding 'Kakke da Paratha', which was found to be spoiled and emitting a foul smell. A particularly concerning allegation highlighted by the FSSAI involves an infant food formulation that was reportedly delivered in a highly deteriorated and unsafe condition, showing signs of contamination and improper storage and handling. Disturbingly, the same product was allegedly re-supplied to the consumer even after the defective item had been returned. Further complaints included the delivery of contaminated eggs and milk, along with damaged packaged food items. Beyond product quality, the FSSAI's notices also raised critical concerns regarding various operational and compliance lapses. These include allegations of incorrect, invalid, or non-existent FSSAI license numbers associated with food business entities listed on the platform. Some entities were purportedly operating under names different from those reflected in their FSSAI registrations. For instance, 'NOICE Eggs' were allegedly marketed under a brand name not covered by the existing FSSAI license, prompting the regulator to direct the Food Business Operator (FBO) not to market such products without a valid license or a required modification. Consumer grievance redressal mechanisms were also found wanting. Several complainants reported that they received no satisfactory response, grievance redressal, or corrective action despite escalating their complaints. In some instances, only a refund was offered without adequately addressing the underlying food safety concerns. This indicates alleged deficiencies in seller onboarding, compliance verification, traceability, food quality monitoring, and the overall supervision of food business activities facilitated by the platform. The FSSAI has unequivocally directed Swiggy Instamart to submit a detailed explanation, supported by documentary evidence, to address the alleged non-compliances and the circumstances leading to these incidents. The regulator has also demanded details of Swiggy Instamart's quality assurance systems, food safety monitoring, inventory management, stock rotation, hygiene, storage, handling practices, and internal controls implemented to ensure food safety compliance. The Food Business Operator has been given a stipulated period to furnish the required explanation and compliance report, with a stern warning that failure to do so could result in appropriate legal action under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. It is important to note that this development comes shortly after Swiggy clarified a separate regulatory matter concerning its budget food delivery platform, 'Toing'. Swiggy had received a prohibition order from the FSSAI on July 6, 2026, related to observations regarding the updation of license particulars for Toing. Swiggy stated that this was an administrative issue, involved no food safety concerns, and was promptly resolved after obtaining a modified FSSAI license on July 9, 2026. The company affirmed that no monetary penalty was imposed for the Toing issue and it is not expected to have any material financial impact. However, Swiggy has not yet issued a detailed public response to the specific allegations outlined by the FSSAI regarding Instamart. This action by FSSAI underscores a heightened regulatory scrutiny of India's burgeoning quick commerce sector, which handles vast quantities of packaged food, groceries, dairy products, and fresh produce. It reflects the regulator's commitment to intensifying enforcement measures in response to a growing number of consumer complaints related to online food and grocery deliveries, emphasizing the paramount importance of ensuring public health and consumer trust in digital delivery platforms.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the primary allegations made against Swiggy Instamart by FSSAI?

The FSSAI has issued notices to Swiggy Instamart based on consumer complaints alleging the delivery of expired food items (like whey protein and mixtures), rotten or contaminated eggs, spoiled ready-to-eat meals, contaminated and re-supplied infant formula, and other damaged packaged foods.

How many notices did FSSAI issue to Swiggy Instamart and what do they demand?

FSSAI issued nine notices to Swiggy Instamart. These notices demand a detailed explanation with documentary evidence addressing the alleged non-compliances, details of the company's food safety systems, quality assurance measures, inventory management, and steps taken to prevent recurrence of such incidents.

Is this issue related to Swiggy's 'Toing' app?

While both incidents occurred around the same time, they are distinct. Swiggy did receive a separate prohibition order related to its 'Toing' platform, concerning administrative observations about updating license particulars, which Swiggy clarified involved no food safety concerns and has since been resolved. The nine notices are specifically for Swiggy Instamart's alleged food safety violations.

What are the potential consequences if Swiggy Instamart fails to comply with FSSAI's directives?

If Swiggy Instamart fails to provide a satisfactory explanation and compliance report within the stipulated period, appropriate legal action may be initiated against the company under the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

Beyond product quality, what other concerns did FSSAI raise?

FSSAI also raised concerns about licensing irregularities, including incorrect or non-existent FSSAI license numbers and entities operating under different names. Additionally, there were allegations of inadequate consumer grievance redressal, with some complaints only receiving refunds without addressing the underlying food safety issues.

Read Full Story on Quick Digest