Jago Grahak Jago

Edit Template

The Aware Consumer

Regulators on Trial: Are Regulators in India Living Up to the Expectations of the Consumers?

When Systems Fail the People They Serve India has established multiple regulatory bodies – the RBI for banking, IRDAI for insurance, RERA for real estate, CCPA for consumer affairs, TRAI for telecom, FSSAI for food safety, CDSCO for pharmaceuticals, and DGCA for aviation. However, complaint volumes tell a different story. The National Consumer Helpline received over 83,000 complaints in 2022-23, approximately 102,000 in 2023-24, and more than 107,000 in the first quarter of 2024-25. Success Cases: When Regulations Function Real Estate: In Gurugram’s Chintels Paradiso project, Haryana RERA ordered developers to refund over Rs 1.7 crore including 11% annual interest plus compensation. Digital Lending: RBI’s guidelines forced hundreds of lending applications to either register properly or cease operations, with proposed legislation criminalizing unregulated lending with imprisonment up to seven years. The Implementation Gap Real Estate Delays: Only 20% of group housing projects in Noida have cleared financial obligations; major developers like Unitech and Amrapali collectively owe tens of thousands of crores. Insurance Mis-selling: Investment products marketed as “guaranteed” deposits, complex ULIPs sold to elderly customers requiring basic protection. Banking Problems: Consumers encounter obscure fees, unilateral contract modifications, and aggressive collection practices despite RBI oversight. Structural Limitations Systemic Stability Priority: Regulators prioritize institutional solvency over individual consumer protection Resource Constraints: Rapidly expanding caseloads exceed processing capacity Institutional Fragmentation: Digital fraud victims may navigate multiple entities without clear accountability Information Asymmetry: Contracts contain dense jargon with minimal plain-language guidance Recommendations Expedited resolution processes with cross-regulator task forces Meaningful deterrence through license revocation and public-capital-raising prohibitions Data-driven proactive supervision using real-time analytics Accessible Consumer Rights Charters at every bank and insurance counter Structured consumer participation through formal consumer councils India requires regulator mindset transformation, not institutional expansion. Success measurement should shift from institutional balance-sheet protection to human-life-savings safeguarding.

Regulators on Trial: Are Regulators in India Living Up to the Expectations of the Consumers? Read More »

Product Labels: What They Reveal – And What They Don’t

The Art of Showing Just Enough While Hiding the Rest Product labels serve as the initial connection between consumers and purchased items. Beyond decoration, they enable brand recognition while helping consumers distinguish between quality products and substandard ones. However, labels frequently conceal rather than reveal information. “If labels told the whole truth, 80-90% Marketing Managers might be out of their job.” What Labels Should Provide Product name and manufacturer identity Complete ingredient lists and nutritional information Usage instructions and expiration dates Health and safety warnings QR codes for additional product information Batch/lot numbers for production history tracing Questionable Marketing Terms “Natural” – Lacks standardized definition in many countries including India. Products may contain artificial additives or preservatives. “Organic” – Requires certification demanding 95% or higher organic ingredient content from bodies like USDA Organic or India Organic. “Sugar-Free” – Products may still contain sugar alcohols or artificial sweeteners. Regulations allow less than 0.5 grams per serving. “Clinically Proven” – A marketing term lacking uniform definition. Companies may conduct small-scale or biased studies. Indian Examples of Misleading Labels Patanjali’s Putrajeevak Beej: Marketing claims of infertility treatment sparked legal scrutiny Nestle’s Maggi Noodles: 2015 FSSAI controversy revealed excessive lead despite “No added MSG” labeling Cadbury’s Bournvita: High sugar and artificial colorants despite health benefit claims A2 Milk and Ghee: Premium-priced products lacked scientific evidence; FSSAI banned A2 labeling without proven benefits Global Examples Barilla Pasta: “Italy’s #1 Brand” when U.S. facilities produced most American-sold products H&M Greenwashing: Marketed conventional cotton as organic without substantiation Low-Fat Foods: High sugar compensation makes these deceptively unhealthy India’s Supreme Court recently mandated states establish advertising monitoring cells to combat misleading advertisements. Consumers must read beyond marketing claims to verify actual product composition.

Product Labels: What They Reveal – And What They Don’t Read More »

The Rs 60,000 Crore Illusion: Inside India’s Counterfeit Liquor Market

Bejon Misra Consumer Policy Expert Counterfeit liquor trade has evolved from a minor concern into a significant systemic issue. According to FICCI CASCADE estimates, illicit alcoholic beverages now represent over 30% of India's market, valued at approximately Rs 60,000 crore. Q. How big is the problem of refilled or diluted premium liquor? The challenge extends beyond occasional enforcement actions. Licensed vendors are regularly caught refilling premium bottles with substandard alcohol. Recent cases in Noida involved counterfeit Ballantine's, Black Label, Red Label, and Jameson bottles with fake QR codes. A Nagpur operation discovered 1,200 liters of watered-down premium alcohol alongside 4,500 empty branded bottles and sealing machinery. Q. What practical anti-counterfeiting measures should liquor companies adopt? Several cost-effective solutions already exist: Non-reusable closures that visibly break upon opening. Serialized QR codes linked to centralized databases – Rajasthan has launched a citizen-accessible app for this. High-security excise labels like Kerala's currency-grade security features. Companies should collaborate with state governments to standardize these systems. Q. Why does refilling remain so prevalent? Empty bottles from premium brands circulate freely through bars, hotels, and scrap dealers. Grey-market vendors provide counterfeit caps, excise labels, and fraudulent QR codes. Enforcement focuses on documentation rather than product verification. Refilling persists because bottle-level traceability remains inadequate and the arrest risk relative to profit margins is low. Q. Is illicit liquor a chronic public-health crisis? Definitively yes. This represents systemic public-health failure. Punjab documented over 170 spurious liquor deaths within five years. Recorded incidents include 121 deaths in 2020, 42 in 2022 Gujarat, and 65 in 2024 Kallakurichi, Tamil Nadu. International specialists characterize methanol poisoning from illicit alcohol as recurring, under-recognized crises. Q. Do we require enhanced legislation or improved enforcement? Both. Existing regulatory authorities possess unutilized powers. The fundamental challenge involves sporadic, reactive enforcement – typically following tragedies. Excise departments face revenue target accountability rather than mortality reduction metrics. Manufacturing spurious liquor should carry capital punishment, with mandatory incarceration for repeat violations. Q. How can consumers protect themselves? Purchase exclusively from licensed retailers. Demand sealed containers. Remain skeptical of suspicious premium brand discounts. In bars, insist bottles open visibly. If taste or aroma concerns you, cease consumption and report. States should mandate verification apps for citizen QR code scanning. Treat the liquor consumer as a citizen with rights, not simply a taxpayer with a bottle. JAGO GRAHAK JAGO.

The Rs 60,000 Crore Illusion: Inside India’s Counterfeit Liquor Market Read More »

Palm Oil: The Invisible Ingredient in India’s Snack Revolution

Palm Oil: The Invisible Ingredient in India’s Snack Revolution first shown on Taazakhabar News How ultra-cheap palm oil has quietly taken over the Indian processed food shelf — and what that means for health and the environment Walk down any supermarket aisle in India and you’ll find a common thread running through chips, namkeen, instant noodles, biscuits, and even frozen snacks — palm oil. It’s rarely mentioned upfront, often hidden behind vague labels like “vegetable oil” or “blended edible oil.” Yet, this single ingredient has reshaped the economics of India’s food industry and the health profile of its consumers. Palm oil’s rise is no accident. It’s the world’s most efficient oil crop, yielding far more per hectare than soybean or sunflower. For manufacturers, it’s a dream come true — cheap, stable, and versatile. For consumers, it’s a silent ingredient in every processed food they eat. Why Manufacturers Love Palm Oil Palm oil’s dominance is rooted in economics. India imports millions of tonnes annually, mostly from Indonesia and Malaysia, where vast plantations churn out oil at rock-bottom prices. For food companies, it offers several irresistible advantages. First, cost. Palm oil is significantly cheaper than other edible oils, allowing manufacturers to keep prices low while maintaining profit margins. Second, shelf life. Its high oxidative stability means products stay fresh longer, resisting rancidity even in India’s humid climate. Third, texture and taste. Palm oil gives biscuits their crunch, noodles their crispness, and namkeen its golden hue — all without altering flavour. In short, palm oil helps manufacturers deliver consistency, affordability, and longevity — the holy trinity of mass-market food production. The Health Debate: Saturated Fat and Oxidised Oil Palm oil’s nutritional profile, however, is far less flattering. It contains roughly 50% saturated fat, primarily palmitic acid — the same compound linked to elevated LDL cholesterol and heart disease. For decades, nutritionists have warned against excessive consumption of saturated fats, urging a shift toward unsaturated oils like sunflower or mustard. But the debate has evolved. Some researchers argue that palm oil, when consumed in moderation and not repeatedly heated, may not be as harmful as once believed. They point to its natural antioxidants — tocotrienols, a form of vitamin E — which may offer protective benefits. Others note that traditional diets in Southeast Asia have included palm oil for generations without epidemic levels of heart disease. The real danger lies in oxidised palm oil — oil that’s been reheated multiple times, as in deep-frying. When exposed to high temperatures repeatedly, palm oil forms trans fats and aldehydes, compounds known to trigger inflammation and cardiovascular damage. In India’s small-scale snack factories and street stalls, where oil reuse is common, this risk is magnified. Case Study: Chips, Namkeen, Instant Noodles, and Biscuits Palm oil’s fingerprints are everywhere. In chips and namkeen, it’s the frying medium of choice, prized for its stability and cost. In instant noodles, it’s used to pre-fry the noodle blocks, giving them their signature texture. In biscuits, it’s the fat that binds dough and fills cream layers, replacing costlier butter or ghee. Each of these products delivers convenience and taste — but also a hidden dose of saturated fat, which is highly hazardous to the health of the consumer. A single packet of chips or a handful of biscuits can contain several grams of palm oil-derived fat, contributing to India’s growing burden of obesity and heart disease. The irony is that palm oil’s neutrality makes it invisible. It doesn’t smell, doesn’t taste, and doesn’t announce itself. Consumers rarely realise how much they’re consuming until they start reading labels closely or are victims of Non-communicable diseases. The Environmental Cost: Forests for Food Beyond health, palm oil carries a heavy environmental footprint. Its cultivation has driven deforestation across Indonesia and Malaysia, destroying habitats of endangered species like orangutans and Sumatran tigers. Peatland burning releases vast amounts of carbon dioxide, making palm oil production a major contributor to global greenhouse emissions. India’s appetite for cheap palm oil indirectly fuels this destruction. While sustainable palm oil certification (RSPO) exists, less than a fifth of India’s imports meet these standards. The rest comes from plantations linked to deforestation, land conflicts, and biodiversity loss. India is not behind such environmental issues. We find huge chunks of land in Southern States getting converted into palm oil cultivation and the States are not regulating such practices adopted by the farmers. The paradox is stark: palm oil helps feed millions affordably but undermines the ecological systems that sustain life itself and at the cost of health and safety of the citizens. Moderation and the Middle Ground Nutrition science rarely deals in absolutes. Palm oil isn’t poison, nor is it a healthy food. The key lies in moderation and diversity. Using palm oil occasionally, alongside other oils like mustard, sesame, or rice bran, can balance fatty acid intake. The problem arises when palm oil becomes the default — as it has in India’s processed food industry. Public health experts now urge consumers to limit processed foods rather than demonise a single ingredient. The focus should shift from palm oil itself to the broader pattern of ultra-processed diets, which combine refined carbs, sugars, and fats in addictive proportions. How to Spot Palm Oil on Labels Palm oil hides behind multiple aliases. To identify it, look for these clues on packaging: Palm oil / Palmolein: Common in fried snacks and instant noodles. Hydrogenated vegetable fat: Often palm-based shortening used in biscuits and bakery items. Vegetable oil blend: Usually a mix of palm and soybean or sunflower oil. Palm kernel oil: Derived from the seed, richer in saturated fat, used in cream fillings and chocolates. Edible vegetable oil (unspecified): A generic term that often masks palm oil’s presence. If the label doesn’t specify the oil type, assume palm oil is part of the blend. Transparency remains a major gap in India’s food laws, leaving consumers to decode vague terminology. The Consumer’s Role: Awareness and Action Palm oil’s ubiquity makes avoidance difficult, but awareness is the

Palm Oil: The Invisible Ingredient in India’s Snack Revolution Read More »

Food Adulteration in India – poison in every plate

Food Adulteration in India – poison in every plate first shown on Taazakhabar News Every morning, millions of Indians begin their day with a glass of milk, a bowl of cereal, or a cup of tea. It is a ritual of nourishment and trust. Yet, as we move through 2026, a disturbing reality has become impossible to ignore: the very food meant to sustain the nation is increasingly being weaponized by greed. From “fake” paneer crafted from sulphuric acid and urea to festive sweets laced with carcinogenic dyes, food adulteration in India has evolved from a sporadic nuisance into a systemic public health emergency. It is, quite literally, a poison for every season and every reason. Food adulteration in India has evolved into a systemic public health crisis and a violation of fundamental human rights, particularly the Right to Life under Article 21. Global evidence reinforces the urgency: WHO estimates 600 million cases of foodborne illnesses annually, causing 420,000 deaths worldwide 33 million DALYs (Disability-Adjusted Life Years) lost annually due to unsafe food Children under 5 account for 30% of deaths India’s own regulatory data shows persistent non-compliance rates (~20–25%) in food samples annually, indicating structural failure rather than isolated violations. The Scale of a Shadow Industry The scale of this crisis is staggering. Despite a robust legislative framework and a flurry of recent reforms, the “poison on our plates” continues to proliferate. In the fiscal year 2024-25, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and state agencies analyzed over 170,000 food samples. The results were harrowing. In several populous states, nearly one-third of samples tested during specific surveillance drives were found to be non-compliant, with a significant portion categorized as “unsafe” rather than just “substandard.” Modern adulteration is no longer just about diluting milk with water or adding pebbles to rice. It has become a high-tech criminal enterprise. We see “synthetic” milk manufactured from caustic soda and cheap oil; palm oil masquerading as mustard oil through deceptive labeling; and neurotoxic brighteners used to make stale vegetables look “farm fresh.” This is a multi-billion-dollar shadow industry that thrives on the anonymity of the unorganized sector, which still constitutes the vast majority of India’s food supply chain. A Poison for Every Season In India, the nature of the poison changes with the calendar. Adulteration is opportunistic, mapping itself onto our cultural and biological needs: Festive Surge: During Diwali, Holi, and Eid, the demand for milk-based sweets (khoya and mava) skyrockets. This is the peak season for “fake” dairy. Seizures in 2025 revealed massive quantities of khoya made from recycled surgical cotton and hazardous chemicals. Summer Heat: As temperatures soar, the demand for refreshing drinks and ice creams peaks. This is when we see the highest incidence of non-permitted synthetic colors and industrial-grade ice being used in street beverages, leading to seasonal outbreaks of typhoid and hepatitis. Monsoon Risks: During the rainy season, when the risk of contamination is naturally high, unscrupulous traders use heavy doses of antibiotics and formaldehyde to artificially extend the shelf life of fish and poultry. Daily Staple: Even the “reasons” for eating are compromised. Whether it is turmeric for its medicinal properties (often laced with lead chromate) or honey for weight loss (frequently stretched with inverted sugar syrup), the very items we consume for health are becoming the vectors for disease. Why the System Stutters: The Enforcement Gap If India has the laws—primarily the Food Safety and Standards Act of 2006—why does the problem, persist? The answer lies in the chasm between legislation and ground-level enforcement. Resource Paralysis: India’s expenditure on food safety is a fraction of what is required. Currently, the budget allocation for food safety monitoring is roughly 0.02% of the health budget. This manifests as a critical shortage of manpower; many districts have only one Food Safety Officer (FSO) for hundreds of thousands of food business operators. The “Paper Tiger” Syndrome: While thousands of violations are recorded annually, actual punitive action is often negligible. Government data shows that while fines have increased, the actual cancellation of licenses is rare. For a wealthy manufacturer, a fine is often seen as merely a “cost of doing business” rather than a reason to reform. The Unorganized Maze: A significant portion of India’s food—from street vendors to local flour mills—operates outside the formal regulatory net. Monitoring millions of micro-entrepreneurs is a logistical nightmare that traditional “command-and-control” regulation is ill-equipped to handle. The 2026 Reforms: A Double-Edged Sword In early 2026, the Union Health Ministry and FSSAI announced a suite of major regulatory reforms. These changes signal a shift toward “Ease of Doing Business,” but their impact on food safety is a subject of intense debate. The introduction of Perpetual Validity for licenses and registrations is a controversial pillar of this new era. By eliminating the need for periodic renewals, the government aims to reduce corruption and red tape. However, critics argue that the renewal process was one of the few times a business was forced to undergo a formal review. To counter this, the FSSAI has shifted toward a Risk-Based Inspection System (RBIS). Under this framework, high-risk categories like dairy, meat, and infant food are prioritized for frequent, computer-scheduled audits, while low-risk businesses face less frequent intrusion. While theoretically sound, the success of this system depends entirely on the integrity of the data and the honesty of the inspectors. Technology: The Final Frontier? If the human element of enforcement is stretched thin, technology must fill the gap. We are seeing promising strides in this area, but they require scaling: Food Safety on Wheels (FSW): There are now over 350 mobile testing labs deployed across India. These units bring testing directly to local markets, providing “on-the-spot” results that can deter local adulterators and educate the public. This is in my view minuscule for a population of 1.4 billion citizens. We should have mobile testing vans in every block of the country and to make that happen we should have at least 7323 testing vans in the country. Digital Traceability: There is an urgent need to mandate QR-code-based traceability for high-risk items like edible oils and

Food Adulteration in India – poison in every plate Read More »

MRP Decoded: What Every Consumer Should Know

MRP Decoded: What Every Consumer Should Know An Interview with RAJIV NATH, Forum Coordinator, AiMeD Most of us glance at the MRP on a product without thinking twice. But, behind that tiny, printed number lies a big story – one that affects how much we pay, how businesses behave and how fairly the market treats consumers. To help simplify this, The Aware Consumer spoke to Rajiv Nath, Forum Coordinator of AiMeD, who has been championing fair pricing and ethical practices in India's medical devices sector. Here, he breaks down the MRP puzzle in simple, relatable terms. Q. MRP was originally introduced as a consumer protection measure. In today's market environment, do you think it still serves that purpose effectively? Yes, it does. Think of MRP as a 'speed limit' for prices – no shop can legally go above it. In medical devices, this is especially important because people often buy them in emergencies or in places with limited choices. Q. With the rise of e-commerce and dynamic pricing, is the concept of a printed MRP becoming outdated? Not really. Online prices may jump around, but the printed MRP acts like a safety net. It ensures there's always a maximum price, especially for essentials like thermometers, BP monitors or insulin syringes. Q. Consumers often judge value based on the difference between the MRP and the actual selling price. How does this perception influence pricing strategies? A big discount makes people feel as if they are getting a steal – even if the MRP was inflated. For example, an oxygen mask with an MRP of ₹2,000 sold for ₹200 looks like a huge bargain, but the real value may only be ₹200. Q. Some manufacturers set very high MRPs to create the appearance of large discounts. What are your thoughts on this practice and its impact on the consumers? It's like calling a ₹50 pen a ₹500 pen and then shouting “90% OFF!” It misleads consumers and destroys trust. In healthcare, where people can possibly buy under stress, this is especially unfair. Q. Critics argue that MRP can discourage price competition among retailers. Do you think the system inadvertently promotes uniform pricing? While the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) ensures a cap on how much consumers can be charged, its effect on actual pricing varies across different sectors. In some cases, strict adherence to MRP leads to near uniform pricing among sellers, limiting the scope for price competition. However, this dynamic shifts noticeably in online marketplaces, where vendors often set prices below the MRP to attract and retain customers. This practice fosters active competition and allows buyers to benefit from reduced prices. In contrast, the scenario is different in corporate hospitals and retail pharmacies. These establishments tend to stock medical device brands with higher MRPs, which translate into larger profit margins for sellers. Patients, especially those seeking medical devices, rarely encounter alternative choices or competing brands, resulting in a lack of price transparency. This limited availability creates a marketplace imbalance, discouraging genuine price competition and leaving consumers with fewer options. As a result, patients may end up paying more, without access to competitive pricing or the ability to compare products based on value. Q. Does MRP restrict pricing flexibility for businesses, especially in a highly competitive market? A bit, yes. Once printed, the MRP can't be changed easily. If costs rise or fall suddenly, businesses can't adjust quickly. It's like being stuck with last season's price tag. Q. What reforms could make the MRP system more realistic and effective? A simple, powerful fix is what we have long recommended: Cap trade margins based on the import‑landed price, not on an inflated MRP. Why? Because some products enter India at ₹100 but apply an MRP of ₹1,000 just to offer huge margins to hospitals or retailers. This pushes hospitals to choose the product with the highest margin, not the best quality or best price as best value for patients. If margins are capped on the real cost, hospitals will choose based on quality, safety and value – which is exactly what patients deserve. Q. Should India move towards a system based more on Suggested Retail Price (SRP) rather than mandatory MRP? For many products, a Suggested Retail Price (SRP) could work well. It gives guidance as well as allows healthy competition. But, for essential medical devices – like insulin syringes, oximeters or BP monitors – MRP still protects patients from being overcharged. Q. What are your thoughts on the government's recent proposal to link MRP to reasonable costs plus margins? Although the idea seems reasonable, it is not practical or effective when applied in reality. Previous efforts in the pharmaceutical industry have mostly failed because there were no consistent and fair reviews of pricing and compensation between regulators and manufacturers. As a result, many manufacturers stopped producing medicines at unsustainable prices or compromised on input quality and manufacturing processes to stay afloat. This ultimately reduced consumers' access to high-quality medicines from reputable manufacturers. Q. Do you believe the MRP system will remain relevant in the future or will pricing transparency evolve in different ways? Yes, but it will evolve. We may see digital MRPs, QR‑based price checks and more transparent online pricing. But the core idea – protecting consumers from overcharging – will always matter. Q. What message would you like to convey to the readers? India needs ethical manufacturers who genuinely want to offer good‑quality, affordable alternatives to expensive imported brands. But, unlike buying a TV or mobile phone – where you can compare prices, shop around and negotiate – patients in hospitals rarely get that choice. Hospitals often push medical devices at full MRP without offering any discounts and prefer brands that give them the highest margins. This sidelines ethical Indian manufacturers who offer fairer, lower‑MRP products. This is why we strongly advocate capping trade margins based on the real import‑landed price. It levels the playing field, encourages hospitals to choose products for quality rather than margin, and ensures patients get

MRP Decoded: What Every Consumer Should Know Read More »

90% of banned or recalled products are being sold on digital platforms

World Consumer Rights Day 2026 carries the theme “Safe Products, Confident Consumers”, chosen by Consumers International. This theme is not just timely but urgent. Unsafe and substandard products continue to circulate widely, especially online. A recent OECD review revealed that 87% of recalled or banned products were still available for purchase on digital platforms. This is alarming. It tells us that despite technological progress, consumers remain vulnerable to risks that should have been eliminated long ago. Product safety is not merely about compliance with standards; it is about justice and accountability. Unsafe goods cause injuries, waste resources, and erode trust. Vulnerable consumers in low‑income countries are disproportionately affected, making this both a development challenge and a rights issue. In 2026, the message is clear: safe products are the foundation of consumer rights, and without them, trust in the marketplace cannot exist. Unsafe Products: A Hidden Epidemic I often recall a case from my early advocacy days in India. A family purchased a branded electric iron from a local store. Within weeks, the product malfunctioned, causing a fire that damaged their home. The company initially refused responsibility, citing “consumer misuse.” It took months of pressure from consumer groups before compensation was offered. This anecdote illustrates a larger truth: unsafe products are not isolated incidents. They are systemic failures. From contaminated food and spurious and spurious or Not of Standard Quality (NSQ) medicines to faulty electronics and unsafe toys, consumers face risks daily. The rise of e‑commerce has amplified these risks, as online marketplaces often lack robust mechanisms to filter unsafe goods nor do they take the onus to assure quality and safety. Digital Platforms and Accountability The OECD’s finding that banned products remain online is a wake‑up call. Digital platforms have become the new marketplace, but accountability and transparency has not kept pace. In India, I have seen consumers receive spurious and NSQ medicines ordered online, or toys without safety certifications. These are not minor inconveniences — they are threats to life and health. Platforms must be held accountable. They cannot hide behind the excuse of being “intermediaries.” If they profit from consumer transactions, they must also bear responsibility for ensuring product safety. Governments must enforce stricter monitoring, and platforms must adopt transparent supply chain practices or told to close the marketplace. Product Safety as Public Health Unsafe products are not just consumer issues; they are public health hazards. Consider the case of contaminated baby food in Europe, which led to widespread recalls. Or closer home, the sale of spurious medicines in India’s informal markets. These incidents highlight how unsafe products can undermine entire health systems. When consumers lose confidence in product safety, they also lose confidence in institutions. This erosion of trust has long‑term consequences. It discourages innovation, weakens markets, and ultimately harms economic growth. Safe products are therefore not only a consumer right but a public health imperative. Personal Anecdote: The Power of Advocacy I remember working with a group of students in Delhi who discovered that a popular snack brand contained excessive levels of lead. The campaign, supported by consumer organizations forced regulators to act. The product was recalled, and new safety standards were introduced. This experience reinforced my belief that consumer advocacy works. When citizens demand accountability, corporations and regulators cannot ignore them. But advocacy requires awareness, organization, and persistence. It is not enough to complain; consumers must mobilize themselves strategically and be able to raise the resources to sustain campaign. Global Comparisons: Learning from Others The European Union has set high standards with its General Product Safety Regulation, ensuring that unsafe goods are swiftly removed from the market. The United States enforces product safety through agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). India has strong laws, but enforcement remains inconsistent due to lack of priority by the State Governments and organisations like Quality Council of India (QCI) and Bureau of Indian Standards. We must learn from these global examples. Aligning with international benchmarks will not only protect Indian consumers but also enhance India’s credibility in global trade. Safe products are essential for building consumer confidence in both domestic and international markets. The Role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) In India, Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been a powerful tool for advancing consumer rights. I recall a PIL filed against misleading advertisements in healthcare, which compelled regulators to tighten oversight. PILs have often filled the gap where enforcement was weak. However, PIL should not be the primary mechanism for consumer protection. Regulators must act proactively, not reactively. PIL is a catalyst, but strong institutions are the backbone of consumer rights. Consumers should not have to resort to litigation for basic protections. Corporate Responsibility Beyond Compliance Corporations must recognize that consumer trust is their most valuable asset. Beyond compliance, they should embed product safety into their business models. Transparent pricing, ethical marketing, and robust grievance redressal systems are not optional — they are essential and mandatory. I often tell business leaders: “Trust is the most valuable asset a company can build.” Companies that proactively protect consumer rights build long‑term loyalty and brand credibility. Those that exploit consumers face reputational damage and regulatory consequences. In today’s competitive market, responsibility is not just a legal obligation — it is a strategic advantage. As I lived in Jamshedpur for 43 years and worked closely with the TATAS, I fondly recall the value system they adopted towards their customers to keep the brand image intact. Emerging Risks: The Next Frontier Looking ahead, three emerging risks demand urgent attention: Digital Monopolies: Tech giants wield enormous influence, and without checks, consumers risk exploitation through opaque algorithms and monopolistic practices. Data Privacy: Consumers often have little control over how their information is used. Strong data protection laws are essential. Greenwashing: False sustainability claims mislead consumers who want to make ethical choices. This undermines both trust and genuine sustainability efforts. India must prepare now with strong laws, vigilant regulators, and empowered consumers. These risks are global, but their impact on vulnerable populations in developing countries is particularly severe.Building Consumer Confidence: A Call to Action On this World

90% of banned or recalled products are being sold on digital platforms Read More »

Playtime or Poison? Harmful & toxic toys in Indian markets

PM Modi’s Call for Safe, Indigenous Toys At the India Toy Fair 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged manufacturers to “make toys that are better for ecology and psychology,” stressing the need for eco-friendly materials, innovation, and self-reliance. He reminded the nation that toys are not trivial—they shape childhood imagination and national identity. In his Independence Day 2024 address, he reiterated that India must not depend on unsafe imports, calling for an Aatmanirbhar Bharat in toys. Yet, despite these warnings, India’s toy market remains dangerously unregulated. Raids, recalls, and seizures continue to expose lead-laden, chemically hazardous, and mechanically unsafe toys flooding shelves and online platforms. The Reality: Unsafe Toys Everywhere Recent enforcement actions reveal the scale of the crisis. Toys with excessive lead, phthalates, and explosion-prone batteries have been confiscated across India. Many were imported illegally, while others were domestically produced with recycled plastics and uncertified dyes. Parents, often lured by low prices, unknowingly expose children to hidden toxins. The result is a silent public health emergency: lead poisoning, hormonal disruption, and fire hazards—all wrapped in bright packaging. Raids and Recalls (2023–2025) Year Location Action Taken Hazard Identified Outcome 2023 Nhava Sheva Port (Mumbai) Customs seizure of Chinese toy consignments Lead paint, phthalates Thousands of toys destroyed; importers fined 2024 Bengaluru & Chennai Product recalls of battery-operated toys Exploding lithium cells Toys pulled from shelves; BIS issued safety alert 2024 Delhi NCR Market raids on local shops Uncertified plastic dolls, choking hazards Hundreds of toys confiscated; traders penalized 2025 Mumbai & Pune Raids on wholesale warehouses Excessive lead, toxic dyes Large consignments seized; criminal cases filed 2025 Online marketplaces Crackdown on uncertified imports No BIS certification, chemical hazards Listings removed; platforms warned of liability Why the Market Is Vulnerable India’s toy sector suffers from weak enforcement of BIS standards, consumer ignorance, and e-commerce loopholes. While BIS certification is mandatory, enforcement is patchy. Small traders bypass rules, importing toys without safety checks. Online platforms, meanwhile, are flooded with uncertified toys shipped directly from overseas sellers. Even domestic manufacturers cut corners, using recycled plastics and uncertified dyes to lower costs. The result is a market where unsafe toys are not the exception but the norm. The Consumer Cost Unsafe toys are not just a regulatory issue—they are a public health crisis. Lead poisoning can cause irreversible brain damage, phthalates disrupt hormones, and faulty batteries pose fire hazards. Children, the most vulnerable consumers, are being exposed daily to risks hidden inside brightly coloured playthings. The World Health Organization has repeatedly warned that no level of lead exposure is safe for children. Yet raids in India continue to uncover toys with lead levels far above permissible limits. Modi’s Vision vs. Market Reality Prime Minister Modi’s speeches have consistently highlighted toys as a sector where India can combine cultural heritage with modern innovation. He has called for toys that reflect India’s traditions, use eco-friendly materials, and meet global safety standards. But the reality is starkly different. The market is flooded with cheap imports that undermine both consumer trust and national pride. Domestic manufacturers, instead of rising to the challenge, often cut corners to compete on price. The gap between vision and reality is widening. What Needs to Change India must act decisively: Stricter Enforcement: Customs and state regulators must intensify raids and impose heavy penalties on violators. Consumer Awareness Campaigns: Parents must be educated to check for ISI/BIS marks and avoid suspiciously cheap imports. Industry Accountability: Domestic manufacturers must invest in safe, eco-friendly materials, aligning with Modi’s vision of an Aatmanirbhar Bharat toy industry. E-commerce Regulation: Platforms must be held liable for selling uncertified toys, with mandatory compliance checks. Call to Action India’s toy industry sits at a crossroads. On one side lies Prime Minister Modi’s vision of a self-reliant, eco-friendly sector that safeguards children. On the other lies the grim reality of toxic imports and unsafe domestic products flooding the market. The choice is stark: either India enforces its standards and protects its youngest citizens, or it risks turning playtime into a silent health hazard. For consumers, vigilance is the first line of defence. For regulators, decisive enforcement is overdue. A good toy should spark imagination—not endanger life. India must act now to ensure that every toy in a child’s hand is safe, sustainable, and proudly made to protect the future. 5 Things Parents Must Check Before Buying a Toy 1. Look for the BIS/ISI Mark Always check if the toy carries the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) certification. This mark ensures the toy has passed safety tests for chemicals, choking hazards, and mechanical risks. 2. Avoid Suspiciously Cheap Imports If the price seems too good to be true, it probably is. Ultra-cheap toys often bypass safety standards and may contain toxic paints, recycled plastics, or faulty batteries. 3. Check Labels and Packaging Read the packaging carefully. Safe toys should list the manufacturer’s details, age-appropriateness, and safety warnings. Avoid toys with missing or vague labels. 4. Be Wary of Online Marketplaces Many uncertified toys slip through e-commerce platforms. Buy only from trusted sellers and check product reviews. If the toy lacks BIS certification, don’t add it to your cart. 5. Inspect Before Play Before handing a toy to your child, inspect it for sharp edges, loose parts, or strong chemical smells. If it looks flimsy or smells of chemicals, it’s not safe.

Playtime or Poison? Harmful & toxic toys in Indian markets Read More »

INTERVIEW : WAJAHAT HABIBULLAH

WAJAHAT HABIBULLAH, (IAS Retd.) Former and First Chief Information Commissioner, Government of India Mr Habibullah has been a member of the Indian Administrative Service since 1968. During his service, he was the Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Ministry of Textiles and Department of Consumer Affairs. He has authored several books and received the Rajiv Gandhi Award for Excellence in Secularism in 1994. He also received the gold medal for distinguished service from the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir in 1996. He has a Bachelor's degree in history from St. Stephens College, New Delhi and a Master's degree in history from the University of Delhi. Q. Why is product safety still an underestimated issue in India? The difficulty with the Indian economy is it started off as a socialist economy. While there's nothing wrong with a socialist economy and there are successful socialist economies, the history of the Indian economy is that it emerged from a colonial economic heritage into a socialist structure – this means that it was concentrated with the government. Hence, consumers were historically treated as beneficiaries rather than economic drivers. Consequently, they were expected to be grateful for what they got rather than being the ones who dictate what they get. However, the consumer cannot merely be a beneficiary – he is actually the mainstay of the economy. What he buys is what governs the running of the economy. The consumer's preference is the basis of the economic structure in a free economy. It is with the concerted efforts and dedication of various consumer activists and organisations that the concept shifted to putting the consumer at the centre of the economy. We still have to strive to ensure that the consumer gets safe products what the consumer wants, not what the government wants the consumer to get as safe products! Q. What are the biggest gaps in the current product safety ecosystem? India today possesses a reasonably developed institutional framework for product safety and consumer protection, supported by legislation such as the Consumer Protection Act 2019, which has a dedicated chapter on product liability and the presence of multiple regulatory bodies including the recent development in establishing for the first time the Central Consumer Protection Authority are landmark milestones on consumer protection. In that sense, the structural elements of a product safety ecosystem are largely in place. The more pressing gaps lie in how effectively these mechanisms are understood, accessed and utilised. A central challenge remains limited consumer awareness. Despite the availability of legal safeguards, grievance redressal mechanisms and regulatory oversight, many consumers are either unaware of their rights or uncertain about how to exercise them. Institutions cannot function optimally if the very stakeholders they are designed to protect do not actively engage with them. Significant efforts are being made by the Department of Consumer Affairs, regulators and civil society organisations to address this deficit. Yet awareness is not merely about information dissemination; it also involves cultivating confidence and assertiveness among consumers to question unsafe products, report defects and seek remedies when harm occurs. This is because unless a consumer demands safety, quality and accountability, nobody is going to respond. Because naturally, the focus of a capitalist is not to benefit of the consumer. The consumer is only a means by which he can make profits. Therefore, even the capitalist has to be made to realise that he's not going to get any profit unless the consumer is satisfied. It is therefore not enough that consumer protection tools exist – consumers must feel empowered and motivated to use them. Q. Is the product liability framework strong enough to protect consumers? India's consumer protection architecture provides mechanisms intended to hold manufacturers and sellers accountable for defective or unsafe products. Yet, the practical effectiveness of these provisions is closely linked to consumer awareness and the accessibility of the existing redressal systems. A framework may be robust on paper, but its deterrent and corrective value diminishes if consumers are unaware of their rights or hesitant to invoke available remedies. At the same time, consumer participation cannot substitute for strong institutions. For example, the RTI Act contains all the guarantors of consumer protection. But, the consumer must himself be aware of his rights and also of the facilities available to enforce his rights. Once that starts happening, then product liability will also become effective. Q. Are safety failures more due to lack of regulation or weak implementation of existing laws? I wouldn't call it safety failure. I would say that consumer protection to the extent intended has not taken place. But these processes are slow and the economy has to adjust to it. And, if you look back on it, the consumer protection laws only started coming in the 1980s, which is not a very long established legal structure. A fundamental principle is that safety is not a concession extended by the government or industry; it is an inherent right of the consumer. Regulatory institutions, policymakers and market participants must continuously reinforce this understanding. Consider routine retail experiences. If we find that a purchased product is not up to the mark, we can ask to return it. While many stores accept the return, some sellers decline returns or refunds by citing 'store policy'. This is against the law. While commercial policies may govern discretionary returns, they cannot override statutory consumer rights in cases involving defective, unsafe, misrepresented or substandard products. Where a product is genuinely deficient or not as promised, consumers are entitled to prompt appropriate remedies under the law. Q. Why does India still lack a strong product recall culture? Recalls do occur, and there have been instances where manufacturers – Tata Nano is a case in point – have taken corrective action upon identifying defects. Such developments indicate that the foundations of a recall mechanism are emerging within the country's consumer protection landscape. However, recalls remain relatively infrequent and often lack the visibility and systemic consistency seen in more mature markets.

INTERVIEW : WAJAHAT HABIBULLAH Read More »

Education or Exploitation: The Dark Side of Borderless Classrooms

In the mid‑2010s, India’s edtech sector was hailed as the great equalizer. Platforms like upGrad reportedly promised prestigious global degrees, “guaranteed” placements, and Ivy League‑level education at a fraction of the cost. Marketed as “borderless classrooms,” they were said to offer students in Tier‑3 towns or busy professionals in Bangalore opportunities they could otherwise never afford. The pitch was irresistible. For a few lakhs, one could earn a “Global MBA” or “Data Science Certification” from universities abroad. India’s middle class, hungry for upward mobility, embraced edtech as a passport to global careers. Glossy ads, celebrity endorsements, and bold claims were said to have fuelled the dream. But beneath the slick marketing lay troubling realities: opaque refund policies, reportedly exaggerated placement promises, and degrees that allegedly carried less weight than advertised. Voices of Discontent The most powerful indictment comes not from analysts or regulators, but from students themselves. Their stories reportedly reveal how lofty promises unravelled into debt, disappointment, and disillusionment. 1. Ansar Basha Lavangiri – From Consumer to Defendant In 2023, Ansar enrolled in a hybrid MSBA program marketed with AACSB accreditation, live classes, and “100% placement assistance.” Instead, he reportedly faced recorded lectures, minimal peer interaction, and failed loan applications due to unclear accreditation. Out of 19 students, only one secured a visa. When he raised the issue of misleading ads and false promises with consumer forums and ASCI, instead of resolving the matter, upGrad allegedly sued him in the Delhi High Court, escalating his hardship. His case is said to highlight how a genuine consumer grievance can spiral into litigation. 2. Abhishek Dixit – Misled by False UGC Approval Claims Abhishek, a licensed aircraft engineer, invested over ₹5 lakh in upGrad’s Global MBA program with Deakin University after being reportedly assured it was UGC‑approved and valid in India. He expected career advancement but soon discovered the degree lacked recognition, rendering it ineffective for professional growth. Promised mentorship and small‑batch learning allegedly never materialized, leaving him disillusioned. Multiple students in his cohort reportedly raised similar concerns. 3. Naseer Ahmad Hurrah – Broken Refund Promise Naseer, an insurance underwriter from Kashmir, paid ₹2.75 lakh for an MBA program after being reportedly assured a full refund if loan facilitation failed. Despite repeated applications through upGrad and partners, his loans were rejected due to undisclosed restrictions linked to his location. For nearly two years, he pursued refunds, but upGrad allegedly refused repayment, offering only evasive responses. 4. Avinash Bharadhvaz Pakala – Exam Bans and Academic Mismanagement Avinash joined an MBA program advertised with “100% placement assistance,” assured interviews, and high salaries. Instead, he reportedly faced poorly conducted classes, delayed results, and arbitrary accusations of cheating. Students were banned from exams for months without evidence, delaying thesis eligibility and forcing paid extensions. Placement support was negligible, and refund requests were allegedly denied. 5. Unni Chandran – Finland MBA Pathway Collapse Unni invested heavily in upGrad’s Finland MBA pathway, resigning from his job and rejecting a lucrative offer based on promises of visa approval and refunds. He paid over ₹8 lakh in tuition, insurance, and travel costs, only to face visa rejection. Despite assurances of full refunds, upGrad allegedly refused compensation, leaving him unemployed and in debt. 6. Bhumika Suresh Sunkad – Abandoned Abroad Bhumika relocated to Germany for a hybrid Master’s program marketed with live classes, visa guidance, and strong placement prospects. After paying over ₹10 lakh, she found classes replaced with recordings and support reportedly withdrawn once visa crises emerged. Declared “on‑campus,” she was left stranded without assistance. 7. Balija Akshaya & Killada Sravan Kumar – Debt and Harassment A young couple, Akshaya and Sravan Kumar, enrolled in an MBA pathway program with promises of easy loans, live classes, and assured placements. Instead, they received pre‑recorded content, shifting requirements, and rejected loans. Unable to pay EMIs, they allegedly faced relentless harassment from recovery agents, legal notices, and public shaming. Lessons Learned: Safeguards for Students and Reforms for EdTech Credibility & Quality: Degrees without recognition or poor delivery reportedly erode trust and careers. Financial Safeguards: Opaque refund policies and misleading loan promises are said to trap students in debt. Global Pathway Honesty: Visa outcomes cannot be guaranteed, yet many programs allegedly marketed “zero rejection risk.” Consumer Protection & Student Vigilance: Grievances often reportedly spiralled into silence, evasive responses, or lawsuits. Education or Exploitation? The EdTech Crossroads The case studies of Ansar, Abhishek, Naseer, Avinash, Unni, Bhumika, Balija and others are not isolated anecdotes. They are seen by some observers as emblematic of a larger crisis in India’s edtech sector — a crisis where glossy promises collide with opaque contracts, where consumer grievances spiral into litigation, and where careers are reportedly derailed by misrepresentation and neglect. The lessons learned — credibility and quality, financial safeguards, global pathway honesty, and consumer protection — are not abstract reforms. They are urgent safeguards. Without them, education risks being reduced to a commodity, stripped of trust and social purpose. India’s edtech sector now stands at a crossroads. It can continue commodifying education, eroding trust, and betraying students, or embrace transparency, accountability, and pedagogy. The choice will determine whether the dream of accessible global education survives — or becomes another cautionary tale of boom and bust. “Education is not a consumer product; it is a social contract.” Affidavit – Ansar Basha Lavangiri Affidavit – Abhishek Dixit Affidavit – Naseer Ahmad Hurrah Affidavit – Avinash Bharadhvaz Pakala Affidavit – Unni Chandran Affidavit – Bhumika Suresh Sunkad Affidavit – Balija Akshaya & Killada Sravan Kumar To UpGrad: Request for Clarification on Student Grievances and Allegations UpGrad Reply: Request for Clarification on Student Grievances and Allegations Disclaimer: This article is published in good faith, in the larger public interest, and without any malafide intention against any individual or organization. The contents herein are based on information reportedly shared by affected students, consumer forums, and publicly available sources. They are presented as fair comment on matters of public concern, with the sole objective of seeking transparency, accountability, and regulatory safeguards in the

Education or Exploitation: The Dark Side of Borderless Classrooms Read More »