Environmental Crimes And Pollution Offenses
Environmental Crimes and Pollution Offenses refer to illegal acts that harm the environment, including air, water, soil, and biodiversity. Such offenses can involve illegal dumping of waste, industrial pollution, deforestation, wildlife trafficking, or violation of environmental regulations. These crimes are serious because they endanger public health, ecosystems, and sustainable development.
In India, environmental crimes are primarily governed by:
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (EPA)
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
Key Provisions
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Section 3: Empowers the government to take measures for environmental protection.
Section 15: Punishes obstruction of officers performing duties under the Act.
Section 16: Punishes failure to comply with environmental regulations.
Water Act, 1974
Section 24: Prohibits discharge of pollutants into water sources without consent.
Section 25: Governs water pollution due to industrial effluents.
Air Act, 1981
Section 21: Prohibits emission of air pollutants above prescribed limits.
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
Sections 9, 51: Punish hunting, poaching, and trade of protected species.
Detailed Case Law Examples
Case 1: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987) – Ganga Pollution
Background: M.C. Mehta filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) highlighting severe industrial pollution of the Ganga river. Factories were discharging untreated chemical effluents directly into the river.
Legal Issues: Whether the pollution of the Ganga violated environmental laws, and what remedies were available to restore environmental balance.
Court Findings:
The Supreme Court held that polluting a river is a violation of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Directed closure or relocation of polluting industries, and mandated treatment of effluents before discharge.
Significance: This landmark case established the principle that environmental protection is a fundamental right and introduced the polluter pays principle.
Case 2: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996) – Industrial Pollution and Sustainable Development
Background: Leather tanning industries in Tamil Nadu were discharging untreated effluents into water bodies, damaging agriculture and drinking water sources.
Legal Issues: Whether industries violating environmental norms can be held liable under the Water and Environment Acts, and whether sustainable development principles apply.
Court Findings:
The Supreme Court held that industries causing pollution are liable to pay for environmental damage.
Introduced the Precautionary Principle and Sustainable Development as binding legal doctrines.
Significance: Strengthened the legal framework for environmental liability, making industries accountable for ecological harm.
Case 3: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1996) – Forest Conservation
Background: A PIL was filed to stop illegal logging and deforestation in the Western Ghats and other forests.
Legal Issues: Whether deforestation without clearance violated the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and environmental norms.
Court Findings:
The Supreme Court prohibited commercial exploitation of forests without approval from the central government.
Strengthened regulations for forest clearance for industries, mining, and development projects.
Significance: This case emphasized the protection of forests as vital ecological assets and enforced strict monitoring of environmental clearances.
Case 4: Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996) – Hazardous Waste
Background: Industries in Tamil Nadu were dumping hazardous chemical waste into agricultural land and water bodies. Local communities suffered health and livelihood damages.
Legal Issues: Whether industries could be held liable for damage to environment and human health under the Environment Act and common law tort principles.
Court Findings:
The court held that industries are strictly liable for environmental damage.
Ordered cleanup of contaminated land and compensation to affected communities.
Significance: Established the strict liability principle and polluter pays principle in environmental law.
Case 5: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988) – Taj Trapezium Pollution
Background: Industries around Agra were emitting sulfur dioxide and other pollutants, threatening the structural integrity of the Taj Mahal.
Legal Issues: Whether industrial emissions can be curtailed to protect heritage monuments.
Court Findings:
The Supreme Court ordered the relocation of highly polluting industries outside the Taj Trapezium Zone.
Introduced the concept that heritage conservation is part of environmental protection.
Significance: Demonstrated the law’s role in integrating environmental protection with cultural heritage conservation.
Case 6: Wildlife Crime – State of Maharashtra v. Wildlife Smugglers (2015)
Background: Individuals were caught smuggling endangered species and animal parts protected under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
Legal Issues: Whether trafficking in protected species constitutes a criminal offense.
Court Findings:
The court held that poaching and smuggling of protected wildlife is a cognizable and non-bailable offense.
Imposed rigorous imprisonment and heavy fines under Sections 51 and 55 of the Wildlife Protection Act.
Significance: Reinforced strict enforcement of wildlife protection laws and deterrence against illegal trade in endangered species.
Key Legal Principles from Case Law
Polluter Pays Principle: Industries or individuals causing environmental harm are legally liable for remediation costs.
Precautionary Principle: Lack of full scientific certainty cannot be used to delay preventive measures against environmental harm.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Citizens can approach courts to protect environmental rights.
Strict Liability: No defense is available for industries or individuals causing pollution or environmental damage.
Integration of Human Rights: Courts recognize environmental protection as part of the fundamental right to life (Article 21).
Conclusion
Environmental crimes and pollution offenses in India are taken very seriously, with courts enforcing stringent remedies, fines, and imprisonment. Case law highlights the judiciary’s proactive role in ensuring environmental protection, public health, and sustainable development. The principles of polluter pays, precautionary measures, and strict liability serve as key tools in combating environmental crimes.
RELATED Blog
0 comments