especially in the wake of renewed protests that began in early 2024. Farmers argue that without a statutory backing, the MSP system remains discretionary and fails to secure them against volatile market forces. While the Court stopped short of issuing a directive, it urged the Centre to consider establishing a structured framework for MSP that ensures fairness and predictability.

Earlier, in January 2021, the Supreme Court had taken the rare step of staying the implementation of the three farm laws, citing deep public concern and inadequate stakeholder consultation. The Court appointed a four-member committee to assess the impact and accept inputs from farmers. Though the committee submitted its report, its recommendations were shelved following the government’s subsequent repeal of the laws in November 2021.

The repealed laws—the Farmers' Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, and the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act—were envisioned as a leap toward market liberalization. However, farmers, especially from Punjab, Haryana, and Western UP, feared these reforms would dismantle the mandi system, empower corporates, and undermine the MSP regime.

Three years since their withdrawal, the policy vacuum remains. No alternate legislative framework has been brought forth to address the structural flaws in Indian agriculture. Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court and several state High Courts have seen a rise in contract farming-related disputes, pointing to the absence of formal protections that the repealed laws had intended to provide. In one notable instance in December 2023, the Punjab & Haryana High Court observed that "contractual arrangements in agriculture, in the absence of legal clarity, leave small farmers vulnerable to exploitation", underlining the urgent need for regulated frameworks.

At the same time, the economic stress in the sector deepens. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, farm-related debts continue to rise, and over 10,000 farmers died by suicide in 2023 alone. The MSP mechanism, in its current form, covers only a fraction of total agricultural produce and benefits just a subset of farmers—mainly in wheat and paddy growing states. In states like Bihar, which dismantled the APMC system in 2006, farmers continue to sell below MSP rates due to lack of procurement infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the Central government has maintained that a legally mandated MSP is fiscally unsustainable. In Parliament and in affidavits filed in court, it has argued that a blanket guarantee would strain public finances, distort crop choices, and make procurement unmanageable. Instead, the Centre has expanded programs like PM-AASHA and e-NAM, though their effectiveness remains uneven.

So, where do we go from here?

India must strike a middle path—reforms that modernize agriculture without compromising farmer security. A balanced law that guarantees MSP for essential crops through price deficiency payments, while regulating contract farming with proper redressal systems, could offer a viable way forward. Stronger investment in rural infrastructure, agri-markets, and climate-resilient farming must complement these steps.

More importantly, policy must be made through dialogue. The failure of the farm laws was not just in content, but in process—passed without adequate consultation, and repealed without replacement. The ongoing legal challenges and judicial observations are a reminder that farmers’ voices must not be excluded from reform.

The field is still open. India must sow the seeds of trust, consultation, and justice—if we are to reap the harvest of true agricultural transformation.