Activist Aruna Rodrigues, through lawyer Prashant Bhushan, has asked India’s Supreme Court to urgently hear claims that the government violated 2024 orders by releasing herbicide-tolerant and gene-edited rice varieties without a national policy.

India’s Supreme Court has been pressed to list for urgent hearing a contempt petition that accuses the central government and senior officials of wilfully disobeying its own directions on genetically modified crops. The plea, brought by long-time campaigner Aruna Rodrigues, centres on the alleged commercial release of herbicide-tolerant basmati rice and gene-edited rice varieties at a time when the court had ordered the formulation of a comprehensive national policy before any such environmental releases.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan raised the matter on Monday before a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. He told the court that approval for the cultivation of herbicide-tolerant genetically modified basmati rice had now been granted, making an early hearing essential. Bhushan stressed that the contempt proceedings arise from the court’s July 2024 judgment and are distinct from a pending reference on GM mustard that is being heard by a special three-judge bench.

Court Directions from July 2024

On 23 July 2024 the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the validity of the government’s 2022 conditional approval for the environmental release of genetically modified mustard. While the two judges disagreed on that specific approval, they were unanimous on one critical point: the Union government must formulate a comprehensive national policy covering research, cultivation, trade and commerce in genetically modified crops. The policy, the court said, must be developed through consultation with experts, state governments, farmers’ representatives and other stakeholders.

Rodrigues’ petition alleges that this direction, along with earlier orders and government assurances given between 2016 and 2017 that no environmental release would occur until the court had addressed the issue, has been deliberately disregarded.

Alleged Releases of Herbicide-Tolerant and Gene-Edited Varieties

According to the petition, herbicide-tolerant basmati rice varieties marketed under the brand name RobiNOweed were commercially released in May 2024. In May 2025, gene-edited varieties including DRR Rice 100 (marketed as Kamla) and Pusa DST Rice 1 were also released. The plea names senior officials, including the secretaries of the environment and agriculture ministries and the chairperson of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee, as respondents.

Bhushan argued in court that the herbicide-tolerant basmati variety “will destroy our basmati. It will contaminate and cause havoc.” The special bench handling the GM mustard reference had earlier declined to take up the contempt petitions, prompting the request for listing before a regular contempt bench.

Risks to Genetic Diversity and Export Markets

India is a centre of origin and genetic diversity for rice, holding more than 80,000 accessions in its germplasm collections. The petition warns that the introduction of herbicide-tolerant varieties risks irreversible contamination of this diversity. A 2013 Technical Expert Committee appointed by the Supreme Court itself had recommended a complete ban on herbicide-tolerant crops, particularly in regions and crops associated with genetic diversity, citing both environmental and health concerns linked to the herbicides used with such crops.

Equally significant for the international community is the potential impact on India’s non-GMO basmati export trade. India is the world’s leading exporter of basmati rice, with annual shipments in recent years exceeding 6 million tonnes and export values reaching several billion dollars. Major markets in the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere place a premium on the aromatic, long-grain rice precisely because it is produced without genetic modification. Any perception of contamination could trigger rejections, tighter testing regimes and long-term damage to a trade that supports millions of farmers in the Indo-Gangetic plains.

Broader Context of Gene-Edited Crops in India

The gene-edited varieties at the centre of the controversy were publicly launched by the Indian government in May 2025 as the world’s first genome-edited rice developed entirely within the country using CRISPR-Cas technology. Officials presented DRR Rice 100 (Kamla), developed from Samba Mahsuri, and Pusa DST Rice 1, developed from MTU 1010, as breakthroughs offering earlier maturity, improved salinity tolerance and higher yields without the insertion of foreign DNA.

Critics, however, have questioned both the scientific claims and the regulatory pathway. In November 2025 the Coalition for a GM-Free India accused the Indian Council of Agricultural Research of selectively presenting trial data and overstating performance advantages for the same varieties. The group argued that official progress reports showed limited or inconsistent gains under real-world conditions.

Regulatory Vacuum and International Implications

India currently permits only Bt cotton as a commercially cultivated genetically modified crop. The regulatory framework for gene-edited organisms that do not contain foreign DNA remains less clearly defined than for transgenic crops, creating what critics describe as a grey zone. The Supreme Court’s 2024 insistence on a national policy was intended to close that gap by ensuring transparent, science-based and consultative decision-making.

The case raises wider questions about how rapidly advancing biotechnologies are governed in one of the world’s largest agricultural economies and food exporters. Rice is a staple for more than half of humanity. Decisions taken in India therefore carry implications for food security, biodiversity conservation and the integrity of global supply chains that rely on non-GMO status.