Important Precedents On Environmental Crimes
Environmental crimes involve violations of laws that protect air, water, land, forests, wildlife, and the overall ecological balance. Over the years, courts—especially the Supreme Court of India—have delivered judgments that shaped environmental jurisprudence.
Below are some of the most important and authoritative cases.
1. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case), 1986
Facts
In 1985, oleum gas leaked from a unit of Shriram Foods and Fertilizers in Delhi.
The leak caused the death of one lawyer and injuries to many.
Public interest litigation (PIL) was filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta.
Issues
What is the liability of industries engaged in hazardous activities?
Is the traditional “strict liability” rule sufficient?
Judgment
The Supreme Court formulated a new doctrine: Absolute Liability.
Industries engaged in hazardous operations are absolutely liable for harm caused, without exceptions.
No defense such as act of God, third-party fault, or employee negligence is allowed.
Significance
Established one of the strongest liability principles in global environmental law.
Strengthened criminal and civil accountability for industries polluting or causing environmental harm.
2. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India, 1996
Facts
Tanneries and other industries in Tamil Nadu discharged untreated effluents into agricultural lands and water bodies.
This caused large-scale contamination and health hazards.
Issues
Whether industries can operate while damaging the environment.
How to balance development and ecology.
Judgment
Supreme Court recognized two important principles:
Precautionary Principle
Polluter Pays Principle
Industries polluting water and soil must pay compensation for restoring the environment.
Court ordered closure of non-compliant tanneries.
Significance
These two principles became part of Indian environmental law under Article 21 (Right to Life).
3. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, 1996
Facts
Several chemical factories in Rajasthan discharged toxic waste.
Soil and groundwater in nearby villages became heavily contaminated.
Villagers suffered serious health impacts.
Issues
Whether polluting industries must pay for environmental cleanup.
Judgment
Supreme Court strictly applied the Polluter Pays Principle.
Polluting industries were directed to:
Pay the full cost of cleaning up the environment.
Compensate all affected villagers.
The court stated that failure to comply would result in criminal liability.
Significance
Strengthened the concept that environmental restoration is the financial responsibility of the polluter, not the government.
4. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1997
Facts
A private company, associated with the former Minister Kamal Nath, diverted the course of the Beas River to protect their resort from flooding.
This interfered with natural water flow and caused ecological damage.
Issues
Whether natural resources can be privatized or altered for private profit.
Judgment
Supreme Court applied the Public Trust Doctrine.
Natural resources such as rivers, forests, and mountains belong to the public.
State must act as a trustee, not an owner.
The resort was held liable for environmental damage and asked to pay compensation.
Significance
Prevents arbitrary or private control of natural resources.
Strengthens public rights over the environment.
5. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (Forest Case), 1995 onwards
Facts
Massive illegal deforestation was occurring across India.
The case started as a complaint about timber felling in Tamil Nadu but grew into the largest environmental litigation in India.
Issues
Meaning of “forest”
Protection of forest land
Licensing of sawmills
Conservation measures
Judgment
Supreme Court expanded the definition of “forest” to include:
Any land recorded as forest in government records
Any area that fits the dictionary meaning of “forest”
Stopped all non-forest activities in forest land without approval.
Regulated sawmills and timber operations.
Significance
Considered a foundation of forest governance in India.
Prevented large-scale illegal logging.
Led to the creation of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA).
6. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Dehradun Quarrying Case), 1985–1987
Facts
Quarrying operations in the Himalayan region near Mussoorie degraded the environment.
Landslides increased, forests were destroyed, and water sources were affected.
Issues
Whether mining can continue despite environmental damage.
Judgment
Supreme Court ordered closure of limestone quarries.
Upheld the principle that environmental protection overrides economic interest when public safety is at risk.
Significance
First major environmental PIL in India.
Linked environmental protection to Article 21 (Right to Life).
7. Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, 1991
Facts
Industrial effluents discharged into the Bokaro River polluted drinking water sources.
A public interest litigation was filed.
Issues
Whether the right to clean water is part of the right to life.
Judgment
Supreme Court held that:
Right to clean and pollution-free water is a fundamental right under Article 21.
Court also warned that PILs must not be misused for personal motives.
Significance
Important precedent affirming clean water access as a constitutional right.
8. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case), 1988–1997
Facts
Tanneries and other industries discharged untreated waste into the Ganga River.
Severe water pollution threatened public health and aquatic life.
Issues
Industrial responsibility for effluent treatment
State duty to enforce environmental laws
Judgment
Supreme Court ordered:
Closure of all tanneries failing to set up effluent treatment plants.
Mandatory installation of sewage treatment plants.
Recognized government duty to maintain clean rivers.
Significance
Strengthened enforcement of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
Conclusion
These cases collectively shaped the framework for dealing with environmental crimes in India, reinforcing principles such as:
Key Doctrines Established
Absolute Liability
Precautionary Principle
Polluter Pays Principle
Public Trust Doctrine
Right to Clean Environment under Article 21
These precedents continue to guide courts, policymakers, and enforcement agencies in addressing environmental crimes with seriousness and accountability.
RELATED Blog
comments