Food safety is a basic public health priority, yet concerns about food adulteration continue to surface in many regions. In Jammu and Kashmir, recent Assembly discussions brought attention to how food quality is monitored, how enforcement works, and where gaps may exist. The data presented by the government offers useful insight into sampling trends, laboratory capacity, prosecutions, and border surveillance. Understanding these elements helps explain how the food safety system functions and where improvements may be needed.
Food Adulteration in Jammu and Kashmir
Food adulteration refers to the addition of harmful or inferior substances to food items, often to increase quantity or shelf life. In Jammu and Kashmir, the issue has drawn attention due to changing patterns in food testing results over recent years.
According to official figures, 9,046 food samples were collected during 2023–24, and 34 samples were declared unsafe. In the following year, 2024–25, authorities collected 7,251 samples, with 33 found unsafe. However, in 2025–26 (up to January 31, 2026), although sampling dropped to 5,682 samples, the number of unsafe samples rose sharply to 130.
This trend is significant because it shows two simultaneous developments:
- Overall sampling numbers are declining
- Unsafe findings have increased notably in the current financial year
Such patterns often trigger closer examination of monitoring systems, supply chains, and enforcement practices.
Food Sampling Trends in Jammu and Kashmir
Food sampling is one of the primary tools used by authorities to detect adulteration and ensure compliance with safety standards. The data from the past three years suggests a gradual reduction in the number of samples collected.
Several factors can influence sampling numbers, including:
- Availability of Food Safety Officers
- Laboratory capacity
- Administrative priorities
- Seasonal market variations
While fewer samples do not automatically mean weaker surveillance, a declining trend can affect the overall detection rate of unsafe food items. At the same time, the sharp increase in unsafe samples in 2025–26 may indicate either improved detection efficiency or a higher presence of non-compliant food products in the market.
From a regulatory perspective, consistent and widespread sampling is generally considered important for maintaining deterrence against adulteration.
Enforcement and Prosecution Under Food Safety Laws
Enforcement actions provide another window into how seriously food safety violations are being addressed. The government reported the following prosecution figures:
- 1,467 prosecutions in 2023–24
- 994 prosecutions in 2024–25
- 967 prosecutions in 2025–26 (till January 31)
Alongside prosecutions, conviction-related disposals were reported as:
- 1,682 cases decided in 2023–24
- 1,296 cases decided in 2024–25
- 1,528 cases decided in 2025–26
The reported conviction rates were over 100 percent for all three years. This can appear unusual at first glance, but the explanation lies in case backlogs. The disposed cases in a given year often include prosecutions filed in earlier years. As a result, the number of decided cases can exceed the number of new prosecutions in the same period.
From an enforcement standpoint, these figures suggest that the legal process is active, though the declining number of fresh prosecutions may invite further review of field-level enforcement.
Food Testing Laboratory Infrastructure in Jammu and Kashmir
Laboratory capacity plays a critical role in identifying adulterated food. The government informed the Assembly that the Union Territory currently has two NABL-accredited and FSSAI-notified food testing laboratories—one in the Jammu division and one in the Kashmir division.
Jammu Food Testing Laboratory
The Jammu laboratory is presently notified for 27 parameters, which define the types of tests it is authorised to conduct. Approval for 327 additional parameters is still awaited. Expansion of testing parameters typically enhances the ability to detect a wider range of contaminants and quality issues.
Srinagar Food Testing Laboratory
The Srinagar laboratory has a broader notification covering 354 parameters, but its scope is limited to specific categories, including:
- Cereal and cereal products
- Spices and condiments
- Milk and milk products
- Fats and oils
- Fruits and vegetables
- Heavy metals and related safety parameters
Laboratory infrastructure is often a key factor in the speed and depth of food safety monitoring. When testing capacity is limited, it can affect both the volume of samples processed and the range of adulterants detected.
Border Surveillance and Role of Food Safety Officers
Monitoring food movement across regions is another important layer of food safety enforcement. Under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Food Safety Officers (FSOs) are responsible for implementing the law at the ground level.
In Jammu and Kashmir, FSOs are posted at the block level. According to the government, 101 blocks, including border areas, are currently covered either through regular postings or additional charge arrangements.
The responsibilities of FSOs typically include:
- Collecting food samples
- Inspecting food businesses
- Ensuring compliance with safety standards
- Initiating legal action when violations are detected
Adequate field presence is generally considered essential for effective surveillance, especially in geographically sensitive and border regions where food products frequently move across jurisdictions.
What the Data Suggests About Enforcement Gaps
When viewed together, the figures presented in the Assembly highlight a mixed picture.
On one hand:
- Laboratory infrastructure exists in both divisions
- Prosecution and conviction processes are ongoing
- Block-level officer coverage has been reported
On the other hand:
- Food sampling numbers have declined over three years
- Unsafe sample detections have risen sharply in the current year
- Fresh prosecutions have shown a downward trend
These patterns do not automatically confirm systemic failure, but they do indicate areas that may warrant closer monitoring, resource review, and policy attention. In food safety systems, consistency in sampling, testing capacity, and field enforcement usually plays a central role in prevention.
Food adulteration remains a complex regulatory challenge that requires coordinated action across sampling, laboratory testing, enforcement, and border surveillance. The recent data from Jammu and Kashmir provides a clearer picture of how the system is functioning on the ground. While institutional mechanisms such as accredited laboratories and Food Safety Officers are in place, trends like declining sampling and rising unsafe findings underline the importance of sustained monitoring and capacity strengthening. Continued review and data-driven policy responses can help ensure that food safety systems remain effective and responsive to emerging risks.
