Cases Involving Environmental Pollution – Criminal Liability Of Enterprises
CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF ENTERPRISES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Environmental protection in India is governed by constitutional provisions, statutory law, and judicial interpretation. Enterprises causing pollution can be held criminally liable under:
Environment Protection Act, 1986
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
Indian Penal Code (IPC) for negligence causing harm
Key principles established by courts:
Enterprises are “persons” under environmental law.
Corporate criminal liability exists; acts of employees may bind the company.
Mens rea (intent) may not always be required; negligence can suffice.
Polluter Pays Principle – liability arises to prevent and compensate damage.
MAJOR CASES
1. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case, 1987)
Facts
Oleum gas leaked from Shriram Food & Fertilizers Factory in Delhi.
Several people were injured and the environment was affected.
Issues
Whether the company and its officials could be held criminally liable.
Judgment
Supreme Court held that enterprises handling hazardous substances have absolute liability under the Pollution Control Laws.
Introduced absolute liability principle for enterprises engaged in hazardous activities.
Significance
Mens rea is not required; negligence or accident by employees can make the enterprise liable.
Foundation for holding industries accountable for environmental disasters.
2. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Taj Trapezium Case, 1996)
Facts
Several industrial plants in Agra were emitting pollutants affecting Taj Mahal.
Judgment
Court held that industries causing pollution can be restrained, even if lawful under statutory norms, to protect heritage and public interest.
Criminal liability can arise under Air and Water Acts if standards are violated.
Significance
Reinforced precautionary principle and polluter pays principle.
Emphasized corporate responsibility for environmental protection.
3. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (Bichhri Industrial Pollution Case, 1996)
Facts
Industries in Bichhri, Rajasthan were dumping toxic waste, affecting soil and water.
Judgment
Supreme Court held industries strictly liable for environmental damage.
Ordered remediation of contaminated land at the cost of the polluting companies.
Criminal prosecution was possible for willful violation of environmental laws.
Significance
Solidified corporate criminal liability for negligent or reckless environmental harm.
Emphasized environmental restoration over mere fines.
4. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996)
Facts
Tanneries in Tamil Nadu discharged untreated effluents into river Palar.
Judgment
Supreme Court applied Polluter Pays Principle.
Held industries liable for compensation to victims and for criminal prosecution under Environmental Acts.
Significance
Established liability for pollution even without intent, as negligence in industrial operations suffices.
Reinforced principle that environmental harm affects public trust, giving courts authority to act.
5. MC Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997 – Reni Coalfield Case)
Facts
Mining operation caused environmental damage in Madhya Pradesh.
Judgment
Court held that the enterprise and its managers could face criminal liability under IPC for negligence and environmental statutes.
Injunctions were issued to stop ongoing operations.
Significance
Extended criminal liability to corporate management, not just the company as a legal entity.
6. Sterlite Industries Case (Copper Smelter Pollution, 2013)
Facts
Copper smelter in Tamil Nadu caused air, water, and soil pollution, affecting thousands.
Judgment
State authorities were directed to ensure compliance with pollution standards.
Enterprises were warned of criminal prosecution under Environmental Acts for failure to mitigate pollution.
Significance
Illustrates modern enforcement of corporate criminal liability, public interest litigation, and environmental activism.
KEY PRINCIPLES FROM THESE CASES
Absolute/Strict Liability of Enterprises
Hazardous industries are absolutely liable for environmental harm (Oleum Gas Case, Bichhri Case).
Polluter Pays Principle
Cost of remediation and compensation lies with the polluting enterprise (Vellore, Bichhri).
Mens Rea Not Required for Environmental Crimes
Negligence or reckless operation is sufficient to attract criminal liability.
Corporate Criminal Liability
Directors, managers, and the company can all be held liable (Kamal Nath, Reni Coalfield Case).
Precautionary Principle
Enterprises must take preventive measures to avoid environmental damage (Taj Trapezium Case).
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Role
Courts actively intervene to enforce environmental laws, even if the state fails (Vellore, Bichhri).
CONCLUSION
Indian courts have progressively strengthened criminal liability of enterprises for environmental pollution:
Liability is often strict and absolute, especially for hazardous industries.
Corporate officials can face criminal charges for negligence, recklessness, or willful violation.
Remedies include injunctions, compensation, fines, and criminal prosecution.
Principles like polluter pays, precautionary principle, and public trust doctrine guide enforcement.
RELATED Blog
comments