🍼 Controversy Brews Over Amul’s Infant Formula Launch as BPNI Files Complaint

India’s largest dairy brand faces scrutiny under IMS Act, 1992

In a recent development that has stirred debate in the infant nutrition space, the Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI) has filed a formal complaint with the Union government against Amul. The issue? The dairy major’s newly launched Amulspray Liquid, a ready-to-feed infant milk substitute.

BPNI, a government-recognised organisation advocating breastfeeding and maternal health, alleges that Amul’s promotion of the product on its website violates provisions of the Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 1992—commonly known as the IMS Act. This law strictly prohibits the promotion of infant milk substitutes in any form.

The act aims to protect breastfeeding by regulating the marketing of formula products, a measure aligned with WHO recommendations. BPNI argues that merely listing the product with promotional elements—such as imagery, descriptors, or availability information—on digital platforms constitutes an indirect promotion, which the IMS Act disallows.

Industry Implications

The move by Amul to launch a liquid format infant formula marks a significant shift from its traditional powdered Amulspray, which has been in the Indian market for decades. Liquid ready-to-feed formulas offer convenience and improved sterility, aligning with global trends, but in India, they must carefully navigate a regulatory minefield that prioritises breastfeeding advocacy.

A Broader Regulatory Debate

This complaint has reignited ongoing discussions within the nutrition and dairy sectors about the balance between innovation and regulation. With urban Indian parents increasingly seeking convenience in infant care, the demand for formula alternatives is rising. However, any marketing of such products must tread cautiously under India’s stringent child nutrition laws.

Legal experts note that if found in violation, Amul could face penalties or be compelled to withdraw the product’s promotional materials. Meanwhile, public health stakeholders urge greater clarity and enforcement around digital content concerning infant food.

What’s Next?

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is yet to issue an official statement. Amul has also not publicly responded to the complaint at the time of publishing. Whether this incident leads to regulatory tightening or clearer digital guidelines remains to be seen—but it has already placed a spotlight on how dairy brands must tread carefully when entering sensitive nutrition segments.