In June 2026, the government announced that India had been included in the list of countries authorised to export food-animal products to the European Union (EU) beyond September 2026. This covered four product categories: Aquaculture products, eggs, honey and animal casings.
At the forefront of this development was the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry, which actively engaged with stakeholders in India and the European Commission to address regulatory requirements and market access issues.
This stems from a series of developments in the EU regulatory framework in response to growing concerns over antimicrobial resistance (AMR). AMR is a global public health concern that occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites no longer respond to antimicrobial medicines. As a result, infections become difficult or impossible to treat, increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, disability and death. Antibiotic use in food-animal production systems is one of the drivers of this One Health challenge.
EU Regulation 2023/905 states that antimicrobials used to promote growth or increase yield, as well as those reserved for treating certain human infections, should neither be administered in animals nor detected in animal products exported from third countries to the EU.
On June 4, 2026, India was added to the list of countries authorised to export such products to the EU through Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1189. Earlier, in 2022, the EU had reserved 37 antimicrobials from use in veterinary medicinal products, medicated feed and even in situations where no authorised veterinary medicine is available (through Regulation (EU) 2022/1255). Of these, 18 were antibiotics, 18 antivirals and one was an antiprotozoal.
To align with these developments, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW), on September 25, 2025, notified the prohibition of the import, manufacture, sale and distribution of 34 antimicrobials for animal use. Of these, 15 were antibiotics, 18 antivirals and one was an antiprotozoal, largely mirroring the EU list except for carboxypenicillins, phosphonic acid derivatives and cephalosporins with beta-lactamase inhibitors.
In February 2026, the Drug Technical Advisory Board (DTAB) of the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) further recommended extending the prohibition to carboxypenicillins and phosphonic acid derivatives for animal use, in line with recommendations from the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying (DAHD). This brings India even closer to fully aligning with EU requirements. Earlier, in May 2025, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry had prohibited the same set of 37 antimicrobials in the aquaculture sector.
This is a positive development for strengthening India's export credibility. "India’s inclusion under the amended European Union regulation is expected to facilitate continued market access for Indian exporters, support trade growth and create new opportunities across the concerned sectors," the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry said in its press release announcing the decision.
CSE Director General Sunita Narain, in her recent editorial for Down To Earth — Prescription for Safer Food — highlights these developments and raises three important questions. Why do critical food safety and public health policies have to be driven by external consumer pressure? How will recent trade-related antibiotic standards be enforced? And, most importantly, what will it take for farmers to remain productive without relying on antibiotics? She argues that food safety must be linked to preventing antibiotic misuse at source while balancing public health and export competitiveness.
CSE analysed these developments to understand what they mean for practices on the ground. Of the 15 antibiotics that MoHFW prohibited in September 2025, nine are antibiotic classes and six are individual antibiotics. According to the WHO list of medically important antimicrobials, all are authorised only for human use. These are mostly high-end antibiotics and are not commonly used in food-animal production. However, the prohibition safeguards against their future misuse in animals and provides an opportunity to monitor whether any such use persists.
"The antibiotics listed are not used either as therapeutic agents or as growth promoters in food animals, though some may be used in pet animals as therapeutic agents, by prescription. Further, they are not cost-effective for use in the dairy, sheep and poultry sectors," said P Anandkumar of Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Andhra Pradesh.
The two additional antibiotic classes now recommended for prohibition by DTAB broadly follow the same principle: carboxypenicillins are authorised only for human use, while phosphonic acid derivatives are authorised for use in both humans and animals.
Indian farmers largely rely on older, cheaper and more readily available antibiotics. CSE's 2021 report highlighted the use of third-, fourth- and fifth-generation cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, macrolides and ketolides, and penicillins. Of the 37 antimicrobials reserved by the EU, the only category India has not prohibited is combinations of cephalosporins with beta-lactamase inhibitors, likely because of their continued veterinary use. MoHFW had earlier prohibited colistin in 2019, and chloramphenicol and nitrofurans in 2025.
Another important regulatory development came in October 2024, when the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) notified that 14 antimicrobials and other veterinary drugs are "not permitted to be used at any stage of production of meat and meat products, milk and milk products, poultry and eggs, aquaculture and its products". It also prescribed an Extraneous Maximum Residue Limit (EMRL) of 0.001 mg / kg. The prohibition came into effect in April 2025.
The list included three antibiotic classes — glycopeptides, nitrofurans and nitroimidazoles — and five antibiotics: Carbadox, chloramphenicol, colistin, streptomycin and sulfamethoxazole. These differ from the antibiotics prohibited by MoHFW, with only limited overlap: one antibiotic class (glycopeptides) and two antibiotics (colistin and nitrofurans).
Many of the antibiotics prohibited by FSSAI continue to be used in practice, so monitoring their residues in food could help drive changes in domestic production practices. CSE has also learnt that FSSAI is working to incorporate the 34 antimicrobials prohibited by MoHFW into its own list, bringing greater regulatory harmonisation.
However, the challenge lies in implementation. FSSAI will need to enforce regular and rigorous monitoring of all prohibited antibiotics in food. Making monitoring data publicly available would strengthen consumer confidence while improving regulatory accountability for food consumed domestically, not just for exports.
This becomes even more important in light of recent export-related concerns flagged by the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA). In June, MPEDA noted that residues of nitrofurans and chloramphenicol continued to be detected in shrimp exports despite being banned. These residues accounted for 43 per cent of export rejections by the EU, the US and Japan in 2025. In response to MPEDA's request, CDSCO directed states to strengthen surveillance, restrict sales to licensed manufacturers and take regulatory action against violations.
At the domestic level, CSE's interactions with stakeholders suggest that despite its ban, colistin continues to be available and used in the poultry sector. Earlier, FSSAI's 2018 National Milk Safety and Quality Survey detected unsafe levels of antibiotics in 77 samples.
Alongside effective implementation and a stronger regulatory framework governing antibiotic use on farms, equal attention must be given to food-animal producers. Farmers need an enabling ecosystem that reduces dependence on antibiotics through awareness, capacity building and stronger extension services.
They must also be educated about and equipped with genuine preventive measures such as vaccination, biosecurity, alternatives including ethnoveterinary medicine, improved farm and waste management, and the use of native breeds and backyard farming systems to reduce disease incidence and minimise the need for antibiotics.
“This is the win-win we need — measures to reduce cost for farmers, and also to produce safe food for us. It is about the food we eat. Food safety is about our health,” advocates Narain.