Khoya adulteration investigations across northern India have exposed more than a festive-season food scare: they have revealed how a decentralised dairy supply chain can move questionable products rapidly between production centres, wholesale markets and urban sweet shops. For Delhi’s consumers, the issue is not simply whether one box of mithai is safe. It is whether the city’s food-safety system can identify, test and stop products before they reach thousands of households.
The immediate trigger was a series of inspections ahead of the festive season. In Uttar Pradesh, the Food Safety and Drug Administration alleged that units in Badshahpur village in Rasoolabad, Kanpur Dehat, were using detergents, refined oil, talcum powder and hydrogen peroxide in the preparation of khoya. Officials recovered 175 packets of skimmed milk powder, about 15 litres of hydrogen peroxide and saifolite, destroyed around 100 kg of prepared khoya and collected samples for laboratory testing.
The allegations remain subject to those test results. That distinction is important because the seized materials do not establish that every product made at the units was adulterated, nor that every sweet sold in Delhi contains the same substances. What the inspections do show is the range of methods authorities are investigating: cheap milk solids can provide bulk, oil can substitute for milk fat, starch can add density, and whitening or surface treatments can alter appearance. The alleged ingredients are workarounds for the qualities consumers associate with traditional khoya.
Under the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India’s standards for dairy products, khoya is made by rapidly drying cow, buffalo, goat or sheep milk, or milk solids. It must contain at least 55% total solids and at least 27% milk fat on a dry-matter basis, and must be free of added starch and added sugar. FSSAI’s guidance describes properly made khoya as having a mildly cooked, boiled-milk flavour and a soft, granular body. Its colour can vary by milk type: cow-milk khoya is pale yellow, while buffalo-milk khoya is white with a brown tinge.
These standards provide a regulatory benchmark, but they also illustrate the practical problem for enforcement. A product is not assessed only by its appearance. Authorities need sampling, laboratory analysis and a chain of documentation to determine whether it meets the prescribed composition and safety requirements. A glossy texture or a familiar colour may make a sweet look authentic, but neither is proof of compliance.
The geography of the reported enforcement action is central to understanding the urban issue. At a second unit in Bhola Nagar, Jhinjhak, officials found refined soybean oil, skimmed milk powder and about 32 kg of prepared khoya. In Kanpur Dehat and Kanpur Nagar, 24 teams inspected units and collected 28 samples. Material estimated at Rs 1.50 lakh was destroyed. At Hatiya Khoya Mandi, 14 samples were taken and about 430 kg of khoya, valued at Rs 1.07 lakh, was destroyed for unhygienic storage.
An FIR was registered at Rasoolabad police station under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, while action to suspend or cancel the registrations of three food business operators began. These steps show that food safety enforcement operates through several channels: inspection, seizure, destruction, laboratory testing, criminal proceedings and action against business registrations. Each addresses a different stage of the problem, and none can substitute fully for the others.
The same supply chain extends into the National Capital Region. FSSAI directed states and Union Territories on September 29 to intensify inspections and sampling during Navratri and Diwali, focusing on milk products, sweets, snacks, edible oil, beverages and ghee. In the previous month, Delhi’s food safety teams destroyed more than 4,100 kg of suspected adulterated khoya and paneer and collected samples of khoya, paneer, chhena and ghee from city markets.
In Mewat, officials seized and destroyed more than 10,000 kg of adulterated paneer over the previous month and reported around 50 raids in identified production hubs. Officials said the supply chain runs through Jaipur, Mathura, Gurgaon, Faridabad and Delhi. This makes adulteration an urban coordination problem rather than an issue confined to the locality where a product is manufactured. A city market may be the point of sale, while production, storage, transport and processing take place across multiple districts and states.
That geography complicates accountability. A municipal or state food-safety team can inspect premises within its jurisdiction, but cannot by itself control the entire route taken by a dairy product. Information about a suspect batch, supplier or production unit must move between agencies. Samples must be collected in a way that supports enforcement. Results must return quickly enough to prevent further distribution. The input also notes that authorities have been directed to record inspections, sampling and outcomes in real time on FoSCoS and FoSCoRIS, indicating the importance of shared administrative records in a mobile food market.
The available evidence also calls for perspective. FSSAI’s pilot survey of milk products in and around Delhi, conducted between October 15 and November 7, 2019, tested 1,041 samples: 438 packed and 603 loose. According to the regulator’s guidance note, the samples showed no major chemical or microbiological safety issues, but predominantly quality and hygiene problems, more often in loose products than in packed products. The survey does not describe the current festive-season market, but it does establish that concerns about food products can involve quality and hygiene failures as well as immediate chemical hazards.
That distinction matters for consumers and regulators. The reported raids concern suspected adulteration and unhygienic storage, while the health risks cited by experts include acute gastritis, diarrhoea, dysentery, dehydration and kidney inflammation in cases involving harmful substances such as starch, urea-mixed milk, caustic soda and non-approved colours. The supplied material does not establish that these outcomes resulted from the products seized in the current inspections. It does show why laboratory confirmation is necessary before authorities or consumers draw conclusions about a specific batch.
The policy response therefore depends on more than seasonal raids. FSSAI’s special drives prioritise products considered vulnerable to adulteration, including ghee, khoya, paneer and sweets. State and local teams are expected to inspect, sample and act, while food businesses remain responsible for complying with standards and maintaining registration. The reported action against three operators in Uttar Pradesh demonstrates how enforcement can move from physical seizure to administrative consequences, although the outcome of those proceedings is not yet stated.
Consumer guidance fills part of the gap between market inspection and laboratory enforcement. FSSAI advises consumers to prefer packed products over loose ones because the probability of adulteration is higher in loose sales. Its guidance note describes a preliminary starch check involving boiling a small piece of khoya in water, cooling it and adding iodine solution; a blue colour indicates starch. The regulator cautions that such home tests are indicators, not laboratory proof. Consumers can report concerns through FSSAI’s Food Safety Connect portal, WhatsApp number 9868686868, email address compliance@fssai.gov.in or toll-free number 1800112100.
The broader urban question is whether food safety can keep pace with the way cities consume. Delhi’s festive demand is concentrated in a short period, but the products may be sourced from a wide geography and handled by multiple businesses before reaching consumers. A raid can remove material from one unit, yet the effectiveness of the response depends on whether linked suppliers, transporters, wholesalers and retailers are also visible to the enforcement system.
The evidence supplied here confirms an active enforcement response, a cross-border supply chain and a significant volume of suspected material removed from circulation. It does not establish that all festive sweets are unsafe, or that every allegation will be upheld after laboratory testing. The next important developments are the test results from the collected samples, the outcome of proceedings against identified food businesses and the inspection data recorded by authorities during the festive-season drive. Those steps will show whether enforcement has identified isolated violations or a wider, traceable pattern in the region’s dairy and sweets market.
