“The impugned advisory dated 16.04.2026 issued by the respondents is hereby stayed only insofar as it relates to the petitioners in W.P.No.14990/2026 and W.P.No.15010/2026 are concerned, till the next date of hearing,” wrote Justice S R Krishna Kumar in the High Court’s decision issued Tuesday.
The interim order responds an over 600-page document submitted on May 8 by a group of dietary supplement manufacturers objecting to an April 16 advisory issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) against the use of ashwagandha leaves in crude or extract or any other form in food products.
The government advisory followed a letter published by the Ministry of (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, and Homeopathy) a day prior, directing product manufacturers to use root only—not leaf—and requiring that all plants parts used be identified on product labels.
It cited a 2024 updated ashwagandha safety dossier and its reports, which categorically recommends root use for health benefit, as well as two studies shared by the ministry identifying “possible safety concerns for ashwagandha leaves due to higher concentrations of reactive withanolides, particularly withaferin A.”
The May 8 petition, however, contends that a prohibition on the use of ashwagandha leaf could only be introduced by formally amending the 2016 Food Safety and Standards (Health Supplements, Neutraceuticals, Food for Special Dietary Use, Food for Special Medical Purpose, Functional Food and Novel Food) Regulations—not through advisories or directives.
It also argues that the restrictions are arbitrary, disproportionate and unsupported by verified scientific research and notes that the petitioning companies hold FSSAI export licenses for ashwagandha extracts from both roots and leaves that they have been producing and exporting since 1990 without objection.
“The Impugned Advisory and Directive are blanket prohibitory orders and are disproportional to the alleged ill-effects of the use of Ashwagandha leaves,” the petitioners wrotes.
“The enforcement of the Impugned Directive and Advisory has cascading legal and financial implications not only for the Petitioners but also for their overseas customers, who in turn are bound by downstream commitments. The Petitioners’ apprehension is that exports and supply of Ashwagandha leaves will be stopped on the basis of the Impugned Advisory and Directive.”
The petition urged the court’s swift response, noting that the business of exporting nutraceutical botanical ingredients operates on the basis of advance purchase orders, long-term supply agreements and that agreements carry binding contractual obligations, including financial liabilities, penalties and reputational consequences in the event of non-fulfilment.
For now, the court’s decision applies only to the petitioning companies and will remain in effect until the next hearing on June 8, 2026 at which time the Union Government and FSSAI may present objections to the petition.
The companies listed include Sami-Sabinsa Group, K Patel Phyto Extractions, SA Herbal Bioactives, Sakti Naturals, OmniActive Health Technologies, Konark Herbals & HealthCare and Unicorn Natural Products.
NutraIngredients has reached out for comment and will update this developing story.