Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Unprecedented Case Demands Extraordinary Remedies: Madras High Court Ordered For Swift Action on Illegal Mining

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision by the Madras High Court, Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan called for immediate and significant action against the rampant illegal sand mining in the state. In his observation, the judge stated, “Extraordinary situations demand extraordinary remedies,” highlighting the urgent need for systemic changes to combat environmental degradation.

The court’s ruling was pronounced on October 11, 2023, after a series of criminal revision cases were presented challenging the denial of the return of vehicles seized by authorities under allegations of illegal sand mining. The vehicles were held under the scrutiny of Sections 379 of the IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957.

Justice Ramakrishnan emphasized the constitutional and statutory duty of the government to protect the environment, as mandated by Articles 51 A and 48 A of the Constitution and the MMDR Act. He pointed out the inefficacy of the current system in dealing with illegal mining and underscored the importance of confiscation proceedings as a deterrent, stating, “The illegal mining is in fact increasing due to the lethargic attitude on the part of the law enforcing authorities.”

The court criticized the slow pace of confiscation proceedings, with data showing that out of 63,542 vehicles seized for illegal mining, proceedings were initiated for only 2,218 and completed for a mere 385. In response, the court has directed the Director General of Police to ensure the initiation of confiscation proceedings within 30 days, and the concerned judicial officers to dispose of these proceedings expeditiously within six months.

Furthermore, the court suggested the establishment of special courts dedicated to handling cases under the Mines and Minerals Act to prevent further environmental damage and effectively implement the law.

Advocates representing various petitioners, along with the Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. T. Senthil Kumar, participated in the proceedings that led to this significant judgment. The court has set a date for reporting compliance, indicating the seriousness with which it views the enforcement of environmental laws and the protection of natural resources.

The High Court’s decision serves as a clarion call for action, stressing that the time for change is now. It reiterates the judiciary’s role in not just interpreting the law but ensuring its execution for the greater good of society and the environment.

Date of Decision: 11.10.2023

Ramar VS The State

Latest Legal News