Right to Food and Food Security in India

Hunger is not merely the absence of food in an individual’s stomach. It is a social and political condition that reveals the deeper failures of society, economy and governance. In India, where millions continue to live with chronic undernutrition even decades after independence, the question of food has moved from the realm of charity and welfare to the domain of fundamental human rights. Hunger begins with birth and accompanies a person until death. When it remains confined to an individual, it is a personal tragedy. When it becomes widespread, it turns into a social crisis whose consequences are difficult to measure.

For centuries, a large section of society has suffered from lack of food while a smaller section has always managed to secure its own supplies. The structure of society, shaped by political, economic, cultural and scientific ideologies, has often prioritised the comfort of a few over the basic needs of the many. The right to food, which should be recognised as an inherent human right from the moment of birth, has repeatedly been treated as an act of benevolence rather than an enforceable entitlement.

Amartya Sen captured the essence of this problem with striking precision: “Starvation is the characteristic of some people not having enough food to eat. It is not the characteristic of there being not enough food to eat.” His insight shifts the focus from aggregate food production to the question of entitlements: who has the economic and social power to command food. Jean Drèze has repeatedly shown that in India the poor often do not count for much in public policy. Even when godowns overflow, distribution fails the most vulnerable. Drèze once observed that when millions remain undernourished while vast stocks of grain lie locked away, the situation borders on a moral catastrophe.

Chaudhary Charan Singh, the foremost voice of India’s peasantry, understood the rural roots of this crisis. He insisted that “the true India resides in its villages” and warned that nothing mocks a nation’s values more than the despair in the eyes of a starving child. For him, ensuring that no child goes to bed hungry was not merely a welfare measure but the highest form of patriotism. His emphasis on the dignity of the cultivator and the centrality of agriculture remains relevant whenever food security is discussed only in terms of urban schemes and central warehouses.

Understanding hunger requires more than counting empty stomachs. Hunger, starvation, poverty and famine form a continuum. Famines and chronic hunger have a long history in India. The real challenge lies in recognising hunger before it becomes a full-blown famine and in treating it as a question of rights rather than relief. Sen’s further observation that “no famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy” underlines the protective role of political freedom, a free press and public accountability. Yet chronic hunger can persist even in democracies if the poor remain politically invisible and administratively neglected.

The international foundation for the right to food was laid by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. Article 25 recognises the right to an adequate standard of living, including food. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), in Article 11, explicitly recognises the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, and the fundamental right to be free from hunger. States parties are required to take steps, individually and through international cooperation, to the maximum of available resources, for the progressive realisation of this right.

Within the Indian Constitution, the right finds support in the Directive Principles of State Policy. Article 39(a) directs the state to ensure that all citizens have the right to an adequate means of livelihood. Article 47 makes the improvement of nutrition and the standard of living among the primary duties of the state. When these principles are read together with the fundamental right to life under Article 21, the right to food becomes a guaranteed fundamental right enforceable by the courts. The National Human Rights Commission, in its proceedings of 17 January 2003, affirmed this reading clearly: the judicial interpretation of “life” under Article 21 means a life of dignity and not mere animal existence; the right to food is an inseparable part of that dignified life; and Article 21 must be read with Articles 39(a) and 47 so that the human right to food can be enforced effectively under Article 32.

The Supreme Court has played a decisive role in giving concrete shape to this right. In the landmark public interest litigation People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of 2001), the Court observed that the highest priority must be given to ensuring food for the aged, the disabled, the weak, poor women and men facing the risk of starvation, pregnant and lactating mothers, and poor children. The Court noted the paradox of overflowing godowns coexisting with hunger. Over subsequent years it issued numerous interim orders that transformed major food and social security schemes into legal entitlements. These included the Integrated Child Development Services, the Mid-Day Meal Scheme, the National Maternity Benefit Scheme, the National Old Age Pension Scheme, the Annapurna Scheme, the Targeted Public Distribution System, the Antyodaya Anna Yojana and the National Family Benefit Scheme. By 2007 the Court had received five reports of its Commissioners, hundreds of affidavits and interim applications, and had passed more than forty interim orders that touched the lives of lakhs of Indians living with severe poverty and hunger.

The National Food Security Act, 2013 and the Legal Framework as of 2026

The long judicial struggle found its comprehensive legislative expression in the National Food Security Act, 2013 (Act No. 20 of 2013), which came into force with effect from 5 July 2013. The Act converts earlier welfare schemes into statutory legal entitlements and covers up to 75 per cent of the rural population and up to 50 per cent of the urban population, bringing approximately two-thirds of the country’s population under its protective umbrella.

Under the Targeted Public Distribution System, priority households are entitled to five kilograms of foodgrains per person per month. Antyodaya Anna Yojana households, representing the poorest of the poor, are entitled to thirty-five kilograms of foodgrains per household per month. These foodgrains are supplied at highly subsidised prices: rice at three rupees per kilogram, wheat at two rupees per kilogram, and coarse grains at one rupee per kilogram. The Act also provides nutritional support to pregnant women, lactating mothers and children through the Integrated Child Development Services and the Mid-Day Meal Scheme (now known as PM POSHAN), along with a maternity benefit of not less than six thousand rupees. In cases of non-supply of entitled foodgrains or meals, beneficiaries have a statutory right to receive a food security allowance.

Rules framed under the Act include the Food Security (Assistance to State Governments) Rules, 2015; the Food Security Allowance Rules, 2015; the Cash Transfer of Food Subsidy Rules, 2015; and subsequent amendments such as the Food Security (Assistance to State Governments) (Amendment) Rules, 2021 and 2022. State Governments have framed corresponding rules for identification of eligible households, distribution and grievance redressal. The Act also contains provisions on women empowerment (eldest woman of the household to be treated as head for ration card purposes), transparency, accountability and the constitution of State Food Commissions.

As of 2026, the National Food Security Act remains the central statutory framework for the right to food in India. Coverage continues to rest on the 2011 Census population figures, which has led to progressive under-coverage relative to the actual population. Implementation challenges persist: exclusion errors, delays in updating beneficiary lists, irregular supply in some regions, quality concerns in mid-day meals and supplementary nutrition, and uneven functioning of grievance redressal mechanisms. At the same time, the legal architecture created by the Constitution, the Supreme Court, the National Human Rights Commission and the National Food Security Act has made it far more difficult for the state to treat hunger as a matter of administrative discretion alone.

The Continuing Challenge

Despite these advances, implementation remains the central weakness. Government programmes exist on paper and in law, yet hunger and undernutrition persist in both villages and cities. Targeting errors, exclusion of genuine poor households, irregular supply of rations, corruption and administrative indifference continue to undermine the schemes. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh acknowledged the gravity of the situation when he declared that “the problem of malnutrition is a matter of national shame” and that “despite impressive growth in our GDP, the level of under-nutrition in the country is unacceptably high.”

The right to food is therefore not a matter of additional schemes alone. It requires a change in perspective: from viewing the hungry as objects of charity to recognising them as holders of rights. It demands transparent identification of beneficiaries, regular monitoring, accountability of officials, and the active participation of the affected communities. Special attention must be given to the most vulnerable groups: primitive tribal communities, households headed by women, families with disabled members, the elderly without support, destitute men and women, pregnant and lactating mothers, and widows.

Jean Drèze has argued that the right to food needs to be linked with other economic and social rights: the right to education, the right to work, the right to information and the right to health. These rights reinforce one another. Taken together, they hold the promise of changing the balance of power in society and of reviving the radical social vision embodied in the Directive Principles of the Constitution.

The struggle against hunger in India is ultimately a struggle for the meaning of citizenship and the content of democracy. A nation that can store millions of tonnes of grain cannot justify the continued existence of starvation and chronic undernutrition. The Constitution, the Supreme Court, the National Human Rights Commission and the National Food Security Act have together created a legal architecture that treats food as a fundamental right. Turning that architecture into lived reality for every citizen remains the unfinished task of the Indian state and of Indian society in 2026. Only when every person can eat with dignity will the promise of independence and the guarantee of the right to life be fully redeemed.

• Charan Singh. (1982). Bharat ki bhayavah arthik sthiti: Karan aur nidan. National Publishing House.

• Collins, L., & Lapierre, D. (1975). Freedom at midnight. Vikas Publishing House.

• Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (1999). General Comment No. 12: The right to adequate food (Art. 11). E/C.12/1999/5.

• Drèze, J., & Goyal, A. (2003). Future of mid-day meals. Economic and Political Weekly, 38(31).

• Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (various years). Works on hunger, public action and development.

• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2005). Voluntary guidelines to support the progressive realization of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security. FAO.

• Government of India. (2013). The National Food Security Act, 2013 (Act No. 20 of 2013).

• Government of India. (2015). The Food Security (Assistance to State Governments) Rules, 2015.

• Government of India. (2015). Food Security Allowance Rules, 2015.

• Government of India. (2015). Cash Transfer of Food Subsidy Rules, 2015.

• Government of India. (2021). The Food Security (Assistance to State Governments) (Amendment) Rules, 2021.

• Government of India. (2022). The Food Security (Assistance to State Governments) (Amendment) Rules, 2022.

• Kent, G. (2002). The human right to food in India.

• National Human Rights Commission. (2003, January 17). Proceedings and observations on the right to food.

• Patnaik, U. (2003). Food stocks and hunger. Social Scientist, 32(7–8).

• Patnaik, U. (2005). Economic reforms and food security and poverty.

• People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of 2001 (Supreme Court of India).

• Sen, A. (2002). Poverty and famines (2nd ed.). Rajpal & Sons.

• United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III).

• United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI).

• UNICEF. (2005). The state of the world’s children 2005.

@ 2025 Chaifry. All rights reserved.