CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Supreme Court Upholds 5-Kilometre Mining Ban Around Chittorgarh Fort to Protect Heritage Monument

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a important decision, the Supreme Court of India has reaffirmed the importance of preserving national heritage monuments, especially in the face of industrial development challenges. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti, ruled to continue the prohibition of mining activities using explosives within a five-kilometre radius of the historic Chittorgarh Fort.

The court, in its judgment, emphasized the significance of the Chittorgarh Fort, stating, "The Chittorgarh Fort represents the quintessence of a tribute to nationalism, courage, medieval chivalry, and sacrifice." This decision is seen as a balancing act between the need for mineral exploitation and the preservation of cultural heritage.

The case arose from a dispute involving Birla Corporation Limited and local activists, highlighting the conflict between limestone mining activities and the preservation of the fort, a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The court noted the potential harm to the monument's structural integrity due to nearby mining activities, especially blasting operations.

In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court considered detailed reports from the CSIR-CBRI, Roorkee, and the Indian Bureau of Mines. These studies assessed the impact of mining activities on the fort, concluding that vibrations from blasting were within permissible limits. However, the court underscored the need for continuous monitoring and further studies using advanced technology.

The Supreme Court has directed the establishment of a multidisciplinary committee to conduct a comprehensive environmental impact assessment. The committee will focus on the impact of mining operations beyond the five-kilometre prohibited radius and will use advanced technological methods for this assessment.

This ruling has been welcomed by conservationists and historians, emphasizing the court's role in safeguarding India's rich cultural heritage. The mining industry, while acknowledging the need for environmental protection, is seeking clarity on the operational aspects of the judgment.

The Supreme Court's decision marks a significant step in the ongoing effort to balance industrial development with cultural and environmental preservation. The outcome of the further studies and assessments will be crucial in shaping the future of mining operations in proximity to heritage sites across India.

Date of Decision: 12th January 2024

BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR VS BHANWAR SINGH AND OTHERS

 

Latest Legal News