The Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust, one of the petitioners challenging the Uttar Pradesh government's ban on halal-certified products, has filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court objecting to statements made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta during the last hearing. The Trust took exception to Mehta's remarks that halal certifying agencies generate "a few lakh crores" through the certification process and that the Court may need to consider whether the entire country should bear the cost of pricier halal-certified products due to the demands of a select few. The Trust argues that the Central government's assertions unfairly maligned and targeted the petitioners, leading certain media organizations to hold debates that further discredited the halal certification process.
The same resulted in creating a narrative against the very concept of halal and its certification process, the petitioner says.
"Unfortunately, the Central Government has made misleading submissions which has created serious prejudice to the concept of halal and enabled the prejudiced media to create a narrative against the very concept of Halal."
Aggrieved by the statements, the petitioner also seeks a direction from the Court to the Central government to disclose as to which Central government officer instructed SG Mehta to make the subject statements, as they were "without any basis, inconsistent with the record and the pleadings sworn on oath by public officials".
"This Hon'ble Court may direct the Central Government for disclosure of the fact as to which officer instructed the Ld. Solicitor General to make such statement before this Hon'ble Court as these statements have caused serious prejudice to the concept of Halal; which is considered to be one of the basic requirements of behaviour and lifestyle (including eating habits and consumption in general) of a very large community of our country. It is a serious issue of religious belief and practice of a large section Indian citizenry and the same is protected under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India."
Furthermore, the petitioner asserts that halal certification is not limited to non-vegetarian items or products meant for export. Instead, it is an essential aspect of every Indian consumer's right to be informed about the products they use in daily life.
"It is also a matter of Right of an individual to be informed with the component used in edible products whether it is vegetarian food or a non-vegetarian food. For instance, Tulsi water, or Lipstick or biscuits with or without chocolate, packaged water bottles are projected to be as ridiculous expansion of Halal Certifications. The said criticism of ridicule is baseless and due to ignorance of fact in general public."
The petitioner contends that the FIRs registered for violating government notifications are an abuse of process and lack justification.
Regarding allegations that halal certifying agencies make substantial financial profits, the petitioner states that the Centre is already aware of its financial records, as they are filed with tax authorities. It provides 14 years of data on its average collections, expenditures, income, and tax payments, revealing that between 2009-10 and 2022-23, its average total collection was Rs. 2,07,83,304, with an annual surplus of approximately Rs. 71.6 lakhs.
Addressing the Solicitor General's concerns about halal certification for items like water bottles, lipstick, and tulsi water, the petitioner clarifies that some manufacturers use animal fat, alcohol-based extracts, or enzymes derived from animals. Additionally, water is often filtered through carbon, which may be sourced from animal bone, necessitating halal certification.
"after advancement of technologies and way of manufacturing different items/products, the manufacturing companies use different components which may or may not be permitted as per the Islamic beliefs within the country or outside the country. Hence, the certification of the products as 'halal' by the issuance of appropriate certificate becomes necessary," the petition states.
In response to the Solicitor General’s claims regarding the halal certification of iron bars and cement, the petitioner categorically denies issuing any such certifications and challenges the Central government to provide strict proof of such claims.
However, the petitioner clarifies that certain steel and cement manufacturers produce materials used for preserving or protecting edible products, such as tin plates and food cans for packaging. Exporting companies may be required by international buyers to ensure that the materials used in packaging comply with halal standards. In such cases, at the request of exporters, the petitioner reviews the manufacturing process and components used, issuing halal certification only if no prohibited substances are found, facilitating international trade.
"It is not for the benefit of the petitioner. It is completely voluntary by the exporting company on whose demand and requirement Halal Certificate is issued."
The petitioner also alleges selective targeting of halal certifications, highlighting that certificates like Kosher are still prevalent, and are being sold in different parts of the country (including UP).
info@adhwaitha.com
