The Supreme Court and India’s Environmental Jurisprudence
Context
In an opinion piece based on a speech, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted the significant role of the Supreme Court in shaping India’s environmental jurisprudence since the Stockholm Conference era. He discussed landmark judicial doctrines that strengthened environmental protection while raising concerns about whether recent judgments are moving away from this established legacy.
Key Highlights
- The Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984) played a major role in strengthening environmental jurisprudence, leading to the evolution of the Absolute Liability Doctrine in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India.
- The Court developed key principles such as Polluter Pays, Precautionary Principle and Sustainable Development through landmark judgments.
- The Public Trust Doctrine, particularly highlighted in M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, established that natural resources are held by the State in trust for the public.
- The 42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976) introduced Article 48A, directing the State to protect the environment, and Article 51A(g), making environmental protection a Fundamental Duty of citizens.
- Environmental protection and economic development are not inherently contradictory; the goal should be to achieve development within the framework of sustainable development.
Key Concepts
- Absolute Liability: Enterprises engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities are absolutely liable for harm caused, without the exceptions available under strict liability.
- Polluter Pays Principle: The polluter is responsible for bearing the costs of pollution, environmental damage and its remediation.
- Precautionary Principle: Environmental harm should be prevented or minimised even when scientific evidence about the potential risk is uncertain.
- Public Trust Doctrine: Natural resources such as rivers, forests and air are held by the State as a trust for present and future generations and cannot be freely appropriated for private interests.
- Articles 48A & 51A(g): Article 48A places an environmental protection duty on the State, while Article 51A(g) makes it a Fundamental Duty of citizens. Article 21 has also been judicially interpreted to include the right to a clean and healthy environment.
Way Forward
- Courts should examine whether development projects comply with environmental laws and safeguards rather than rejecting genuine environmental challenges at the threshold.
- Strengthen inter generational equity while ensuring consistent application of established environmental principles.
- Balance economic development with ecological protection through credible and effective sustainable-development safeguards.