The Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court challenging “misleading” remarks made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta regarding halal certification during the case’s last hearing on Uttar Pradesh’s ban on halal-certified products, reported Live Law on Monday.

The affidavit takes exception to Mehta’s statement that halal-certifying agencies make “few lakh crores” from the certification process and questions whether “the entire country should bear the brunt of costlier halal-certified products just because they are demanded by a few.”

The trust contended that these remarks have maligned the petitioners, leading to media debates that further vilified the halal certification process. “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,” the affidavit states.

The petitioner has also sought a direction from the Supreme Court for the Centre to disclose which official instructed Mehta to make these statements, calling them “without any basis, inconsistent with the record and the pleadings sworn on oath by public officials”.

The trust argued that halal certification is “a serious issue of religious belief and practice” protected under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, which deal with religious freedoms.

The trust asserted that halal certification was not limited to non-vegetarian items or exports and is relevant to all consumers. “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,” it says, citing examples such as lipstick, biscuits and bottled water.

The affidavit challenges the claim that halal certifiers make exorbitant profits, stating that the Centre was aware of their financial records. The trust provided 14 years of financial data showing an average annual collection of Rs 2.07 crore and an average surplus of Rs 71.6 lakh between the financial years 2009-’10 and 2022-’23.

On Mehta’s remarks about halal certification for cement and iron bars, the trust stated that it had never certified such products and demanded strict proof of this claim from the government. However, it clarified that some steel and cement manufacturers ensure halal compliance for packaging materials used in food exports.

“It is not for the benefit of the petitioner,” the affidavit states. “It is completely voluntary by the exporting company on whose demand and requirement Halal Certificate is issued.”

The trust also alleged selective targeting of halal certification, noting that kosher certificates remain in circulation.

Background

On November 18, 2023, the Uttar Pradesh government banned the “manufacture, sale, storage and distribution of halal-certified products with immediate effect,” citing a complaint by a Bharatiya Janata Party youth wing member who alleged that certifying bodies issued “forged” halal certificates to boost sales among Muslims. The ban applies only within Uttar Pradesh and does not extend to export products.

Following criticism, the state government allowed a 15-day grace period for retailers to withdraw halal-certified products and ordered 92 manufacturers to recall and repackage goods certified by non-approved organisations.

Halal, meaning “lawful” in Arabic, refers to food and products permissible under Islamic regulations. While India has no legal halal certification authority, private bodies issue such certificates, primarily for export. However, some products enter the domestic market as manufacturers avoid separate packaging costs.

The Supreme Court has given the petitioners four weeks to respond and scheduled the next hearing for the week beginning March 24.

Also read: How Uttar Pradesh’s halal ban has plunged the processed food industry into chaos