AHMEDABAD: Gujarat's food safety machinery has significantly intensified surveillance against adulterated and substandard food, but parliamentary data suggests that enforcement is not translating into equally strong criminal accountability.
According to data submitted by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Gujarat analysed 68,356 food samples between 2021-22 and 2025-26. Of these, 4,437 samples were found to be non-conforming, indicating an overall failure rate of nearly 6.5 per cent.
During the same period, authorities initiated 4,617 civil penalty cases but secured only 259 criminal convictions, exposing a substantial gap between regulatory action and successful prosecution.
The year-wise figures reveal that Gujarat consistently detected between 824 and 978 non-conforming food samples annually.
2021-22: 13,663 samples analysed; 824 unsafe; 668 penalty cases; 14 convictions.
2022-23: 14,562 samples analysed; 978 unsafe; 547 penalty cases; 24 convictions.
2023-24: 15,841 samples analysed; 910 unsafe; 1,701 penalty cases; 65 convictions.
2024-25: 12,387 samples analysed; 901 unsafe; 859 penalty cases; 91 convictions.
2025-26 (provisional): 11,903 samples analysed; 824 unsafe; 842 penalty cases; 65 convictions.
The data indicates that while the number of unsafe food samples has remained broadly stable, criminal convictions have increased over the years, from 14 in 2021-22 to 65 in 2025-26. However, the number of convictions is still only a fraction of the food samples found to be unsafe each year.
Gujarat continues to rank among the leading states in food surveillance.
In 2025-26, the state analysed 11,903 samples, significantly higher than Maharashtra (7,694) and Punjab (7,809), though behind Tamil Nadu (44,603) and Uttar Pradesh (39,519). The high volume of testing reflects an aggressive inspection mechanism rather than a higher incidence of adulteration alone.
However, Gujarat's non-conforming rate of around 6.9 per cent was substantially lower than Rajasthan, where more than one in four tested samples failed quality norms, and Uttar Pradesh, where over half the tested samples were found non-conforming during 2025-26.
Another striking trend is Gujarat's greater reliance on civil enforcement.
In 2025-26 alone, authorities disposed of 842 civil cases with penalties, compared to only 65 criminal convictions. Similar trends are visible across previous years, suggesting that regulators frequently opt for financial penalties and administrative action rather than lengthy criminal prosecution.
The Centre informed Parliament that food safety enforcement has expanded sharply nationwide. Food inspections increased from 3.57 lakh in 2023-24 to 4.01 lakh in 2024-25 and further to 5.20 lakh inspections in 2025-26 (provisional). Over the last five years, 4,461 food licences were suspended and 11,493 licences were cancelled for violations of food safety norms.
The numbers suggest Gujarat has built a relatively strong food surveillance system, consistently testing large numbers of food samples while maintaining a lower proportion of non-conforming samples than several major states. Yet the data also points to a persistent weakness: detection is far outpacing criminal punishment.
Thousands of inspections and hundreds of unsafe samples each year are resulting in comparatively few convictions, raising questions about the speed of investigations, quality of evidence, and effectiveness of prosecution under the Food Safety and Standards Act.
As food adulteration continues to pose a public health challenge, the next phase of enforcement may depend less on increasing inspections and more on ensuring that violations culminate in swift and credible convictions.