Environmental Crime Prosecutions: Illegal Mining, Deforestation, Poaching
1. Introduction: Environmental Crimes
Environmental crimes refer to illegal acts that harm the environment, biodiversity, or natural resources. In India, such crimes include:
Illegal Mining: Extraction of minerals or resources without proper authorization.
Deforestation: Unauthorized felling of trees or destruction of forest land.
Poaching and Wildlife Crimes: Hunting, trafficking, or harming endangered species.
Legal Framework
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Broad powers to regulate, prevent, and punish environmental harm.
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 – For prosecution of poaching and illegal trade in wildlife.
Forest Conservation Act, 1980 – Regulates forest land use and deforestation.
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – Governs legal mining operations.
Air and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Acts – To address pollution violations.
Investigative and Prosecution Strategy
Multi-agency coordination: Forest departments, wildlife crime control, police, and environmental regulators.
Use of satellite imagery and drones for monitoring illegal deforestation and mining.
Forensic analysis for evidence of poaching, wildlife trafficking, or chemical discharge.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) often plays a key role in environmental prosecutions.
2. Landmark Cases
Case 1: Sterlite Copper Plant Pollution Case (Tamil Nadu, 2018)
Facts:
Sterlite Copper Plant in Thoothukudi was accused of massive environmental pollution, including air and water contamination.
Protests erupted after alleged health hazards and groundwater contamination.
Legal Action:
National Green Tribunal (NGT) and State Pollution Control Board initiated investigation under the Environment Protection Act, 1986.
Closure of the plant and imposition of heavy fines on the company.
Judgment:
NGT upheld environmental concerns and penalized the company for violating environmental norms.
Significance:
Highlights industrial pollution as an environmental crime and the role of regulatory authorities in prosecution.
Case 2: Odisha Illegal Mining – Forest Clearance Scam (2013–2015)
Facts:
Companies engaged in illegal mining in ecologically sensitive areas, violating Forest Conservation Act and MoEF norms.
Legal Action:
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and CBI investigated violations.
Court orders halted mining in many areas pending compliance.
Judgment:
Supreme Court directed closure of illegal mines, recovery of environmental compensation, and punishment for corporate officials.
Significance:
Demonstrates judicial intervention in large-scale illegal mining affecting forests and biodiversity.
Case 3: Niyamgiri Hills Mining Case – Vedanta (2010–2013)
Facts:
Vedanta proposed bauxite mining in Niyamgiri Hills, Odisha, a sacred area for tribal communities and ecologically sensitive.
Legal Action:
PIL filed challenging the violation of Forest Conservation Act and tribal rights under PESA Act, 1996.
Investigations included forest clearances and environmental impact assessments.
Judgment:
Supreme Court ruled in favor of tribal communities, blocking mining citing environmental and cultural harm.
Significance:
Landmark for environmental justice, indigenous rights, and forest conservation.
Case 4: Project Tiger & Poaching in Ranthambore (2012)
Facts:
Several poachers were apprehended for hunting tigers and selling skins and bones in black markets.
Legal Action:
Prosecution under Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections related to illegal hunting and smuggling.
Judgment:
Conviction of poachers with imprisonment and fines.
Confiscation of weapons and wildlife products.
Significance:
Demonstrates strict application of wildlife protection laws in India.
Case 5: Bandipur and Nagarhole Tiger Reserve Poaching Case (2014)
Facts:
Poachers using snares and firearms killed tigers and transported body parts for trade.
Legal Action:
Forest department and Special Task Force conducted raids and investigations.
Charges included illegal hunting, trafficking, and violation of Wildlife Protection Act.
Judgment:
Special Court convicted offenders; confiscation of vehicles, firearms, and tiger parts.
Significance:
Reinforces importance of proactive monitoring and field enforcement in wildlife crime.
Case 6: Uttarakhand Deforestation – PIL Against Illegal Logging (2015)
Facts:
Rampant illegal felling of forest trees in Uttarakhand for commercial purposes.
Legal Action:
PIL filed in High Court under Forest Conservation Act and Environment Protection Act.
Satellite imagery and forest department reports used as evidence.
Judgment:
High Court directed immediate stoppage of logging, punishment for contractors, and restoration of degraded land.
Significance:
Demonstrates judicial use of technology (satellite imagery) in environmental crime prosecution.
Case 7: Ganga Pollution Case – PIL by M.C. Mehta (1985–Ongoing)
Facts:
Industrial effluents and untreated sewage were polluting the Ganga river.
Legal Action:
Supreme Court monitoring via PIL.
Directed industries to install effluent treatment plants and imposed fines.
Judgment:
Ongoing enforcement and compliance actions; some industries closed for violations.
Significance:
Shows public interest litigation as a tool to prosecute environmental crimes, particularly industrial pollution.
3. Key Observations
Environmental crimes require a mix of administrative, judicial, and field enforcement actions.
NGT, High Courts, and Supreme Court play a central role in prosecution and enforcement.
Use of technology (satellite imagery, drones, forensic labs) is increasingly important.
Corporate accountability is enforced via strict penalties under Environment Protection Act, Forest Conservation Act, and Wildlife Protection Act.
Public interest litigation (PIL) has been pivotal in exposing and prosecuting environmental crimes.
4. Prosecution Strategies
Rapid investigation and evidence collection – forensic sampling, documentation, and satellite data.
Attachment and closure of offending industries or mines to prevent further damage.
Coordination between agencies – forest department, pollution control boards, police, and NIA in wildlife crimes.
Use of wildlife crime networks and poacher records for preventive measures.
Judicial monitoring and strict timelines for compliance and conviction.
5. Conclusion
Environmental crime prosecution in India is multifaceted and involves:
Illegal mining: Odisha illegal mines, Vedanta Niyamgiri case.
Deforestation: Uttarakhand illegal logging.
Poaching and wildlife trafficking: Ranthambore, Bandipur-Nagarhole cases.
Industrial pollution: Sterlite Copper, Ganga river pollution cases.
These cases collectively demonstrate:
The need for specialized enforcement strategies.
The role of judiciary, PILs, and environmental tribunals in securing convictions.
Importance of technology, forensic science, and multi-agency collaboration in tackling environmental crimes.
RELATED Blog
comments