The Indian Constitution requires both the state and the citizen to “protect and improve the

environment”. Natural resources need to be protected and nurtured. The liberalization and
globalization of the economy makes it imperative that we increase our vigil to ensure that
industrial growth is not at the cost of the environment.

“Sustainable development” is an ill-defined but catchy phrase. If we interpret it as

development in which the environment can sustain, which does not exceed the carrying
capacity of the environment, which does not over-exploit or destroy the natural resource base,
many parts of the country could be identified as unsustainable, even beyond reprieve.

We live and work for a good life, good food, good health and but are living with polluted air
and water, shortages of water and fuel. So is industrialization at the cost of our health and
comfort sustainable?

The term ‘sustainable development’ was coined by Indian economist, Nitin Desai. He coined
the term while he was a senior economic adviser to the World Commission on Environment
and Development (WCED) or the Brundtland commission. The commission was established
by UNEP Governing Council in 1983.

The report of the Brundtland Commission defines sustainable development as “development

that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs.”

Sustainable development means that the richness of the earth’s biodiversity would be
conserved for future generations:

 by greatly slowing and, if possible, halting extinctions, habitat and ecosystem

destruction.
 also by not risking significant alternations of the global environment that might – by an
increase in sea level or changing rainfall and vegetation patterns or increasing ultraviolet
radiation - alter the opportunities available for future generations.

Perhaps the answer lies in the decision of the Supreme Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan v.
Union of India wherein it was observed that “Sustainable development means what type or
extent of development can take place, which can be sustained by nature/ecology with or
without mitigation.” In this context, development primarily meant material or economic
progress.

Being a developing country, economic progress is essential; at the same time, care has to be
taken of the environment.

How can sustainable development, with economic progress and without environmental
regression, be ensured within the Indian legal framework?

This can be achieved through the implementation of good legislation.

The courts have attempted to provide a balanced view of priorities while deciding
environmental matters. As India is a developing country, certain ecological sacrifices are
deemed necessary, while keeping in mind the nature of the environment in that area, and its
criticality to the community. This is in order that future generations may benefit from policies
and laws that further environmental as well as developmental goals. This ethical mix is
termed sustainable development, and has also been recognized by the Supreme Court in the
Taj Trapezium case.

In State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products the Supreme Court invalidated a
forest-based industry, recognizing the principle of inter-generational equity as being central
to the conservation of forest resources and sustainable development.
What are the key policies relating to the environment in India?
There are three key policies relating to environmental protection in India. They are:

 The National Forest Policy, 1988

 Policy statement for Abatement of Pollution, 1992

 National Conservation Strategy and Policy Statement on Environment and

Development, 1992

How is ‘Environment’ defined under Indian Law?

According to Section 2(a) of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986, ‘Environment’
includes
a) Water, air and land
b) The inter-relationship which exists among and between,
i) water, air, land, and
ii) human beings, other living creatures, plants, microorganisms and property

What are the different statutes / legislations enacted in India exclusively for
environmental protection?
The different statutes / legislations enacted in India exclusively for environment
protection are

 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1975

 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977

 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1978

 The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

 The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1982

 The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

 The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986

 Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989

 Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989

 The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

 The Forest (Conservation) Rules, 1981

 The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972

 The Wildlife (Transactions and Taxidermy) Rules, 1973

  The Wildlife (Stock Declaration) Central Rules, 1973

 The Wildlife (Protection) Licensing (Additional Matters for Consideration) Rules,

1983

 The Wildlife (Protection) Rules, 1995

 The Wildlife (Specified Plants - Conditions for Possession by Licensee) Rules, 1995

 The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991

 The Public Liability Insurance Rules, 1991

 The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995

 The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997

What is the difference between the laws enacted before and after independence with
respect to environmental protection in India?
There are about two hundred laws dealing with environmental protection both before and
after independence in India. However, the pre-independence laws have not dealt with
environmental protection exclusively. For example, the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, had a
chapter (chapter XIV) which dealt with offences affecting public health, safety and
convenience, which covered aspects like water, air and noise pollution, whereas the post-
independence laws mentioned above deal exclusively with environmental protection.

What are the provisions in the Indian Penal Code for environmental protection?
The Indian Penal Code has a chapter on offences affecting Public Health, Safety,
Convenience (Chapter XIV). Sec. 268 provides that “a person is guilty of a public nuisance
who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger
or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the
vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger, or annoyance to persons
who may have occasion to use any public right.” The section further explains that a common
nuisance is not excusable on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage. Other
concerned provisions are: a “negligent act likely to spread infection or disease dangerous to
life” (Sec. 269 IPC.), a “malignant act likely to spread infection or disease dangerous to life”
(Sec. 270 IPC.), “making atmosphere noxious to health” (Sec. 278 IPC.).

But the essential requirement of the provision to punish a man is the guilty intention of the
accused, i.e. either the act of the accused should be negligent, malignant or voluntary, which
vitiates the atmosphere. In case of public nuisance, the Penal Code provides for fines up to
Rs. 200/- by way of punishment (Sec. 290 IPC.) and for making the atmosphere noxious to
health Rs. 500/- only (Sec.78 IPC.).

The punishments are too meagre to meet the objectives. With these penal provisions, it is not
possible to check environmental pollution.