Case Law On Environmental Crimes And Natural Resource Protection
1. M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case), 1988
Court: Supreme Court of India
Key Issue: Pollution of the Ganga river by industries in Kanpur.
Facts:
M.C. Mehta filed a petition against the Kanpur tanneries and other industries discharging untreated effluents into the Ganga, which caused severe water pollution, harming human health, aquatic life, and the environment.
Court Decision:
The Supreme Court recognized the right to a clean environment as part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Industries were ordered to either install effluent treatment plants or shift out of the city.
The Court introduced the “Polluter Pays Principle”, meaning the industry causing pollution must bear the cost of remedial measures.
Significance:
Established strict liability for environmental damage.
Reinforced public interest litigation (PIL) as a tool for environmental protection.
This case became a benchmark for river pollution control in India.
2. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India, 1996
Court: Supreme Court of India
Key Issue: Environmental degradation due to tanneries in Tamil Nadu.
Facts:
The petitioners alleged that tanneries in Vellore discharged untreated effluents into agricultural land and water bodies, causing serious environmental and health hazards.
Court Decision:
Applied the Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle in India.
Directed industries to implement effluent treatment and pay compensation for environmental damage.
Significance:
This case formally incorporated international environmental principles into Indian law.
Strengthened the legal framework for controlling industrial pollution and protecting natural resources.
3. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs. Union of India (Bichhri Toxic Waste Case), 1996
Court: Supreme Court of India
Key Issue: Hazardous chemical waste dumping in Rajasthan.
Facts:
Industries in Rajasthan were dumping toxic chemical waste on agricultural land in Bichhri, causing environmental degradation and health problems for local communities.
Court Decision:
The Court held that the Polluter Pays Principle is part of the law of the land.
Industries were directed to clean up the affected area and compensate victims.
Established that environmental restoration is a legal obligation of the polluter.
Significance:
Reinforced accountability of industries for environmental damage.
Highlighted the rights of affected communities to seek legal redress for environmental harm.
Demonstrated the proactive role of the judiciary in environmental protection.
4. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India (Forest Conservation Case), 1996
Court: Supreme Court of India
Key Issue: Forest conservation and illegal logging in India.
Facts:
The petitioner challenged widespread deforestation in the Western Ghats, alleging illegal tree felling and encroachment of forest lands.
Court Decision:
Emphasized the need to protect forests for ecological balance.
Banned large-scale diversion of forest land for non-forestry purposes without clearance.
Established that forest conservation is a fundamental public interest.
Significance:
Strengthened forest protection laws in India.
Expanded the concept of environmental jurisprudence to include forests and biodiversity.
Laid the foundation for stricter regulations on forest clearance.
5. M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case), 1987
Court: Supreme Court of India
Key Issue: Industrial hazard and liability for environmental accidents.
Facts:
A chemical plant in Delhi leaked Oleum gas, causing public danger and deaths. The case highlighted the risk posed by hazardous industries to human health and the environment.
Court Decision:
Introduced the doctrine of absolute liability for hazardous industries.
Unlike strict liability, no exceptions (act of God, etc.) are allowed for enterprises engaged in hazardous activities.
The company was held fully responsible for compensation to victims.
Significance:
Created a strong legal precedent for industrial accountability.
Strengthened laws to protect communities from industrial environmental hazards.
Key Takeaways from These Cases
Polluter Pays Principle: Industries causing environmental damage must bear the cost of remediation (Mehta vs. Union of India, Vellore Citizens, Bichhri case).
Precautionary Principle: Preventive action is required even if scientific certainty about harm is incomplete (Vellore case).
Absolute Liability: Hazardous industries are fully responsible for accidents, with no exceptions (Oleum gas leak).
Environmental Rights as Fundamental Rights: Clean environment is part of the right to life (M.C. Mehta cases).
Forest and Biodiversity Protection: Conservation of natural resources is a public duty (Godavarman case).
RELATED Blog
0 comments