&w=3840&q=100)
Smog, Yamuna pollution biggest environment issues in Delhi: SC judge
Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Karol on Thursday said smog and Yamuna River pollution were the biggest environmental issues in the national capital.
The judge was speaking at the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) Climate Change Conference and Awards 2025 when he emphasised on environmental protection.
Each citizen, he said, was responsible to protect the environment and the onus wasn't just on the judiciary, the executive and the legislature.
"We have to make sure that the environment, be it in any form, has to be protected. I would also say this, that over the years we have developed certain principles, and the public trust doctrine is one such doctrine which we must always keep in mind," Justice Karol said.
He continued, "But I would say this, if you were to see our report card in the last 75 years, or since the 1980s, what have we done? Have we done enough to protect the environment? My view is that a lot needs to be done, at all levels. And I would borrow an expression, that the solution to the problem now is grassroots solutions to an international problem. The way forward, according to me, is that we as individuals have to take up the causes pertaining to the environment." Environmental issues could not be left to the courts for passing of verdicts, the legislature for making relevant laws or the executive for implementing them, he added.
"Each one of us, as responsible citizens, has to understand, become aware of, and ensure that we protect the environment for posterity." He highlighted the two major issues -- air pollution and a polluted Yamuna -- Delhi has been grappling with required attention.
"I don't know how many of you have travelled in the metro, or how many of you have gone beyond the Lutyens. But if you go to Noida or Trans-Yamuna, you would see what Yamuna really is. These are the two biggest challenges," Justice Karol said.
He outlined judiciary's "zealous" role in protecting the environment.
"The reason is very clear. And it is that Mother Earth is not ours. We are there for her and we are there not only for her but also for posterity, for future generations, not only in India, but the world over," the judge said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Salwa Judum case: Legislative workaround and limits of contempt power
The doctrine of separation of powers must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy, the Supreme Court said in its May 15 order ruling that any law made by Parliament or state legislatures cannot be held to be in contempt of court. The decision by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma came while dismissing a 2012 contempt petition filed by sociologist Nandini Sundar and others against the Chhattisgarh government for enacting the Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, alleging the law violated an earlier SC order. The bench held that the law did not amount to contempt of the SC's 2011 landmark judgment that disbanded the state government-backed Salwa Judum, terming it unconstitutional. Salwa Judum was a government-backed militia formed in Chhattisgarh in 2005, which used armed tribal civilians to combat Maoist violence. The contempt plea claimed that the Chhattisgarh government failed to comply with the 2011 order to stop open backing of vigilante groups like the Salwa Judum, and instead went ahead and armed tribal youths in the fight against Maoists. It said there had been a clear contempt of the SC order when the state government passed the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, which legalised arming tribals in the form of Special Police Officers (SPOs) in the war against Maoists. The petitioners further submitted that instead of disarming SPOs, which was a key constituent of the SC's 2011 order, the Chhattisgarh government legalised the practice of arming them. They also argued that the victims of the Salwa Judum movement had not been adequately compensated. In the latest ruling of May 15, the Supreme Court said the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 does not constitute a contempt of court per se, and that the balance between sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained. 'Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law," the bench said. If any party wants that the legislation be struck down for being unconstitutional, the legal remedies would have to be presented before an appropriate constitutional court, the bench noted.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Assam to use 75-yr-old law to push back illegal migrants
Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court , while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967. Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
FIR now must if plaint clearly discloses cognizable offence
Mumbai: The State Police Complaints Authority (SPCA) on Thursday directed all police stations and chowkeys in the state via the Director General of Police, Maharashtra, that the registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the criminal procedure code if the information disclosed to the police by the victim at the first instance clearly shows commission of a cognizable offence, wherein no preliminary inquiry is permissible. "If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence, but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not. If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered," the authority has stated in its order citing similar orders from the Supreme Court in the past. The order came upon a case wherein a central government employee had approached Satara police over a serious physical abusive assault by his senior in th office. However, despite it being a cognizable offence upfront, and that being incumbent upon the police to register an FIR, the local police did not follow the law, and on the contrary, registered an NC. The SCPCA has not only directed the DG to file compliance of the order within next two weeks, but also directed the home department to initiate disciplinary or legal actions against the four police officials who did not file FIR. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further, the authority stated further. "Accordingly, it was mandatory that preliminary inquiry should be made time-bound and in any case, it should not exceed fifteen days generally, and in exceptional cases by giving adequate reasons, six weeks time is provided. The fact of such delay and causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry," stated the copy of the order obtained by TOI. The order was issued by the three-member authority led by retired Justice Shrihari Davare as chairperson along with Umakant Mitkar and Vijvay Satbir Singh as the members. "The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering an offence if a cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence," the order stated further pointing out that the scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.
