The Delhi High Court has set aside an order of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) directing Red Bull to stop using the descriptor “Energy Drink” on its caffeinated beverages, holding that the company was not given an opportunity of being heard, and has left FSSAI free to take a fresh decision after hearing it.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday set aside an order of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) directing the Austrian beverage producer Red Bull to stop using the term “Energy Drink” for its caffeinated beverages, holding that the order was passed without giving the company a chance to respond [Red Bull v. Union of India and Others].
Justice Amit Mahajan allowed Red Bull’s petition on the limited ground of breach of natural justice, and said that FSSAI will be free to take a fresh decision after following the principles of natural justice and giving Red Bull an opportunity to be heard. The Court did not decide whether Red Bull can ultimately continue to use the descriptor. This report is based on media accounts of the hearing and order, and LawChakra has not yet reviewed the written order.
The dispute
Red Bull challenged an order of June 30, 2026, issued by an Assistant Director of FSSAI, directing it to discontinue the descriptor “Energy Drink” on its range of caffeinated beverages. It also challenged a communication of July 17, 2026 directing food safety authorities in the States and Union Territories to act against products considered non-compliant.
The company’s case was that it has sold its products in India with the descriptor since 2002, and that the June 30 order was issued without a show-cause notice or a hearing. It said the July 17 communication led to enforcement action, including seizure of its products at several locations. It also relied on a March 2024 FSSAI advisory which, according to the petition, clarified that the expression “Energy Drink” was permissible for products licensed under the relevant categories of caffeinated beverages.
Background of the hearing
When the petition was first heard on Monday, September 28, the Court asked FSSAI to take instructions on whether any show-cause notice had been issued to Red Bull, or whether it had been given an opportunity to explain its position, before the June 30 order was passed. According to reports, no interim protection was granted at that hearing.
The Court’s finding
The Court noted that it was undisputed that the order directing Red Bull not to use the term was passed without giving it any opportunity to file a reply or give an explanation. According to Bar & Bench, the Court was not persuaded that later interactions between the parties cured the absence of a hearing before the order was passed, and it therefore quashed the June 30 order.
What happens next
FSSAI is at liberty to pass a fresh order after hearing Red Bull. Reports say the order also leaves the broader question of whether the descriptor can continue to be used open for FSSAI’s fresh consideration. Whether the July 17 communication to the States and Union Territories stands or falls with the June 30 order is not clear from the reports, and it will depend on the written order.
Why it matters
The ruling rests on procedure alone. A regulator’s direction that halts the use of a label that a company has used for over two decades, and that leads to seizures, cannot be issued without first hearing the affected company. The Court left the substance of the label dispute for the regulator to decide afresh, and made no finding on the regulatory status of energy drinks or on the March 2024 advisory.
Case Title: Red Bull v. Union of India and Others
Bench: Justice Amit Mahajan, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: September 29, 2026